Useful information to look through: http://www.masters-of-photography.com/S/sherman/sherman_resources.html
General information from http://www.cindysherman.com/
turned the camera on herself
"most of her pictures are of her, however they are definitely not self-portraits"
interesting to think that, of course I an contest this point of view
"Sherman has raised challenging and important questions about the role
and representation of women in society, the media and the nature of the
creation of art."
begun in 1977, Sherman places herself in the roles of B-movie actresses.
Her photographs show her dressed up in wigs, hats, dresses, clothes
unlike her own, playing the roles of characters. While many may mistake
these photographs for self-portraits, these photographs only play with
elements of self-portraiture and are really something quite different.
In each of these photographs, Sherman plays a type -- not an actual
person, but a self-fabricated fictional one. There is the archetypal
housewife, the prostitute, the woman in distress, the woman in tears,
the dancer, the actress, and the malleable, chameleon-like Sherman plays
all of these characters.
"For a work of art to be considered a portrait, the artist must have
intent to portray a specific, actual person. This can be communicated
through such techniques as naming a specific person in the title of the
work or creating an image in which the physical likeness leads to an
emotional individuality unique to a specific person. While these
criteria are not the only ways of connoting a portrait, they are just
two examples of how Sherman carefully communicates to the viewer that
these works are not meant to depict Cindy Sherman the person. By titling
each of the photographs "Untitled", as well as numbering them, Sherman
depersonalizes the images."
"There are also very few clues as to Sherman's personality in the
photographs - each one is so unique and ambiguous that the viewer is
left with more confusion than clarity over Sherman's true nature.
Sherman completed the project three years later, in 1980, when she "ran
out of clichés" with which to work. This series gave Sherman much
publicity and critical acclaim; she had her first solo show at the
nonprofit space, the Kitchen, in New York City. In 1980 Sherman also
created a series of what she called "Rear-Screen Projections" in which,
similarly to the Film Stills, Sherman dressed up and paraded against a
projected slide background"
"Sherman's second most known body of work came some time after the Film
Stills had already been well received, around 1988-1990. In the History
Portraits Sherman again uses herself as model, though this time she
casts herself in roles from archetypally famous paintings. While very
few specific paintings are actually referenced, one still feels a
familiarity of form between Sherman's work and works by great masters.
Using prosthetic body parts to augment her own body, Sherman recreates
great pieces of art and thus manipulates her role as a contemporary
artist working in the twentieth-century. Sherman lived abroad during
this time in her life, and even though museums would appear to be the
source of inspiration for this series, she is not a fan of museums:
"Even when I was doing those history pictures, I was living in Rome but
never went to the churches and museums there. I worked out of books,
with reproductions. It's an aspect of photograph I appreciate,
conceptually: the idea that images can be reproduced and seen anytime,
anywhere, by anyone.""
Books:
Simon Johnson www.thephilosophicalphotographer.co.uk
Posts
