Comments on: David LamelasDemarcating three objects, 1968(Installation view, Hyde Park, London)

By: tom moody

tom moody — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 15:32:12 +0000

Just occurred to me that the angular movement of the objects in the “mehretu” could be caused by the earth’s rotation during levitation, so the “north wind” joke wasn’t completely necessary.

By: Christopher

Christopher — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 13:32:13 +0000

….and like everything else….

By: tom moody

tom moody — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 20:30:15 +0000

Yes, poor David, doomed to be a victim in a Gabber YouTube.

We may have something like Godwin’s Law here: “all attempts to depict the spacetime continuum eventually look like Julie Mehretu.”

By: joel

joel — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 18:15:26 +0000

Tom, I think u just made a Julie Mehretu.

POOR DAVID!

By: tom moody

tom moody — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 17:16:19 +0000

Sorry for the crudeness of this but I feel compelled to follow this non sequitur through to its conclusion: “Levitating Three Objects (In A Strong North Wind) (apologies to Joel and David)”:

By: britta

britta — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 06:10:45 +0000

oh yeah, i didn’t think it was directly related (since this isn’t an infographic really). it reminded me of it, though, as a different use of the same visual element, which i think is neat!

By: tom moody

tom moody — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 03:09:31 +0000

Agreed that’s what you’re doing (I should have said “Photoshopâ€™s moving 2-D line” instead of 3-D). I just butted in because the page Britta linked to, while graphically wow, injected a theme into the work (time) that I didn’t think was there, entirely. The ants aren’t really marching–more like running in place. Just playing metaphor cop.

By: joel

joel — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 01:45:04 +0000

*crickets*

BUT

well put, but um… i think of it more like metaphors. Selecting individual objects on a cartesian plane. Lamelas is breaking the grid by using this metaphor in the real world (im attributing this to him 40years after the fact.. i know that he doesnt think of this piece having anything to do with technology..) and im using it as a token to bring it back to the 2-d. Like a double-negative.

By: tom moody

tom moody — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 01:34:43 +0000

But…but…

“the dashed line has emerged from a designerâ€™s shorthand and from the limitations of monotone printing techniques, it has a clear and simple visual magic, the ability to express something three- or four-dimensional in two dimensions.”

Neither Joel nor David Lamelas is using the dashed line in this instance to express something 4-D.
Lamelas is applying a simple graphic convention to nature (a kind of Pop art in space), and Joel is riffing on that with Photoshop’s moving 3-D line.
It’s true that Photoshop uses the dashes to say “cut here,” implying a future action, and it’s true that Lamelas is photographed in the act of sequentially laying down the dashes. But most people would not see the dashes as indicating motion in time–merely demarcating space in a graphically snazzy way.

*crickets*

By: joel

joel — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 23:02:26 +0000

Thats amazing, thanks Britta.