06.06.2016

Elizabeth Hollander

Very interesting essay on the model, “ the model’s sole end is the image she makes of herself”.

Interesting that the female pronoun is used for the model and the male pronoun for the artist.

I agree that the classic idea is that  the model is “something apart” from the artwork but the model is something more than “the audience” although I think that the model could be part of the audience.

A use for Venn diagrams in the above?

The author was herself a model. It was insightful to read about that experience. It complimented the reflections of our classmate who is also a life model. It showed the model’s acknowledgement of the impact their professionalism may have on the artwork and her response to different artistic media. Hollander sees the model as collaborator  in the process and distinguishes drawing and painting. Drawing is more intimate. I loved the quote from Quentin Crisp. I knew he was a life model. I didn’t know that he drew. I found some images on the web. Enjoyable.

I found the reflections of the experience of being a model for a piece of sculpture rang true. The insights into the model’s role in the sculptor’s finished product were more laboured. Whilst the artist may grapple with the relationship between the model and the emerging creation, I don’t think many art lovers think of this.

The reflections on photography were fascinating. The authors thoughts on fashion photography being the only the mode of photography that engages the model’s authoritative presence”, ring true. It is a collaboration. They are both in the employ of the magazine so the power divide is lessened. They are more equal.

“How a model contributes to a work of art is a secret in the sense that it is confined to the process of making in the studio.”

The argument that the invention of the camera allowed artists to create a more subjective vision of the model is very persuasive.

Hollander, Elizabeth. “Subject Matter: Models for Different Media.” Representations, no. 36 (1991): 133-46.