Saturday, August 2, 2008
I am guilty of doing this with past artwork myself. You see it often on a painting, photograph, 3D art piece; "Untitled", followed by a description of the artwork in parentheses? After a while you ask yourself, why didn't the artist just name the piece the description that they used to explain it's content?
I have been criticized in past shows by art critics that my titles say too much. That because of the title, I don't leave enough room for the viewer to make up their own mind, conclusion, or interpretation, of the art being viewed. Do you write a novel or short story and leave it "Untitled"? Isn't the main goal of an artist to communicate?
So what are your thoughts as an artist or as a patron of the arts? Do you like the work to be titled, untitled, just provide a literal description of the piece, or provide a title that pushes you toward the artists intent?
Old man, newsman, street vendor; how would you title this photograph?