[Table of Contents] [Search]


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [BKARTS] Stella Waitzkin Website (fwd)



I couldn't access the website on Google.

Signa

-----Original Message-----
From: Book_Arts-L [mailto:BOOK_ARTS-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of
Michael Joseph
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 7:45 AM
To: BOOK_ARTS-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Stella Waitzkin Website (fwd)


Dear Friends of Stella Waitzkin,

We are pleased to announce the launching of the website devoted to the art
of Stella Waitzkin.  It is accessible at stellawaitzkin.com.

Please be sure to view the video of Stella's Chelsea Hotel apartment.

Thank you all, again, for your interest in and support of this wonderful
artist's work.

Sincerely,

Charles Russell
Trustee
Waitzkin Memorial Library Trust

-----

Of course, there are many who know Waitzkin's work, but for the many who
don't, I would like to add to Professor Russell's note the brief
explanatory sidebar, that Waitzkin was not a book-artist, she was an
artist who recursively used books and the book shape to form and give
meaning to her sculpture. Book artists who happen to have an inclination
to wonder about the dynamic between art and books will find her work
stimulating, I think. There are a number of scans (unfortunately low res)
under the rubrics "library" and "sculpture," which will give a good
sampling of Waitzkin's book related work.

Under "texts" there is a short and wonderfully lucid commentary by Arthur
Danto, which will also be of interest to members of this list who are more
analytically minded.

I found this comment on Waitzkin's technique exciting:

"The books were embalmed but rendered unusuable and turned into art"

Danto seems to be suggesting that the act of rendering a book unusuable
turns it into art, a suggestion that turns on the assumption (perhaps one
that he has formed under the influence of Waitzkin's work) that a book
cannot also be art, or, just to focus a bit, art's basic and primary
function, which, I assume Danto assumes, is to signify, negates or messes
around with the book's functionality.  We might infer a few things from
Danto's phrase, or from Danto's reflection on Waitzkin's booklike
sculptures: that an object cannot simultaneously be a book and a work of
art, that "book art" is something of an impossibility (thinking of the
fine rather than decorative arts), and that a sophisticated rather than a
naive "book artist" might begin from the point of recognizing the
impossibility of his or her work, rather than, say, pondering the briny
question, 'is my artwork a book'!


Best,
Mike Joseph

             ***********************************************
Now Online - The Bonefolder, Vol. 2, No. 1 at
<http://www.philobiblon.com/bonefolder>

             For all your subscription questions, go to the
                      Book_Arts-L FAQ and Archive.

          See <http://www.philobiblon.com> for full information
             ***********************************************

             ***********************************************
Now Online - The Bonefolder, Vol. 2, No. 1 at <http://www.philobiblon.com/bonefolder>
                                    
             For all your subscription questions, go to the
                      Book_Arts-L FAQ and Archive.
                                    
          See <http://www.philobiblon.com> for full information
             ***********************************************


[Subject index] [Index for current month] [Table of Contents] [Search]