Today is the Oscars. My friend calls it the LA Senior prom which totally fits. To prep myself for this years event I strolled over to LACMA to catch the Larry Fink show at the Resnick. The thing I was most puzzled by, other than the interesting area of focus for each photo, was the fact that a quarter of the 30 or so pictures are untitled. I think naming something "untitled" is a total and complete cop out. Names of art do not have to be profound, they can be very simple. I had a friend in art school who once named a piece:
"I worked really hard on this so like it, okay"
Which was great. The piece was funny, that name was funny. I think a name helps you identify with the art. It is hard to come out of the Fink show and have a friend ask you what is your favorite.
"Well, it is the untitled one."
"Which untitled one?the one with the tired girls curled up in chairs and the one gets the stolen kiss?"
"No."
"Is it the one with the girl that is wearing a satin dress with the side boob and cellulite"
"No, but it is the untitled one on the next wall"
"The one with the two purses"
"No, it is the one where the woman looks like she is bearing her breasts to the paparazzi"
"Oh that one, I had you pegged for the one with the woman from the neck down that looks really bored"
See, unnecessarily confusing.
If I could take a sharpie and go back and name things without getting fined for public defacement, I would name them.
"clutches"
"unfortunate dress"
"the kiss"
"just a little bit bored"
Never "untitled".
