Why is it, despite their evocative shapes,
that clams and mussels rarely make an appearance in art? Is it because of Marcel Broodthaers? To use them again is to stand in his shadow.
(Image via)
Andre Petterson, opening in June in Foster/White Gallery, is giving it a go from a different angle: Shells as evidence of geological layering bursting from the innards of an outdated machine. Except for the inexplicable addition of red, I’m with him.
Of course, the outdated machine he chose has already unraveled as a kind of signature for William Kentridge.
(Image via Greg Kucera Gallery)
You gotta know the territory. It’s also true that artists who let the past stop them make no mark on the present.
Hi Regina — I get so much out of reading abb.You always make me think. Speaking of shells, remember Georgia O’Keeffe’s notorious clam shell cross sections? Mare
that petterson piece is wild…
Seems to me that Salvador Dali did a piece involving mussel shells and a cadillac, at his museum in Figueres, many many years ago…
Just imagine a strip mall highway similar to our own Aurora Ave whereby all of the retail signage is removed and is replaced by clumps of mussels jutting out from the overhead retail storefronts, similar to the very cool work you featured by Nancy Rubins. http://www.gagosian.com/artists/nancy-rubins/
Sumptuously disgusting, I know, and plagiaristic to boot. But the dreamy thought of the wares being advertized from open mussel shells is too much to resist. My apologies.
To view another aquatic idea, go here, http://kmarulis.wordpress.com/