<Writing in Exhibition II>

1. Analysis on works by a specific artist
Through this seminar, the participants had the opportunity to practice analytical writing on specific works according to the characteristic of the work. Focusing on Exotic-Minority-Oriental by Bahc Yiso as an example, the seminar interpreted the conditions that could be signified through the text and image signs in the work. Also, it shed light on the mechanism through which the same symbols and image signs are artfully activated in the context of other signs and signifiers formed according to the different types of audience in terms of regions, race, etc. In a good writing, it rightfully talks about the relationship of tension produced in the conflict of symbols. Roland Barthes refers to the “multiplication of signifiers”, and talks about a gap that’s formed when a new sign forms the signified. When there are different views in analyzing work, it’s good to throw in all possible premises at the beginning and then gradually develop the text to definite symbol. On the other hand, text overflowing with speculations is not a good writing.

2. Personality of the Text ? Writing Style and Structure
When analyzing an artist’s work, it’s good to begin by describing the works and then analyze the visual information. If the writing is a theoretical text on art work, faithful portrayal of the work is necessary and unlike exhibition introduction writing, it’s important to classify the order and content of the writing according to the purpose and use of the text. The seminar looked at States of Identity: From Migration to Interracial, a writing on Bahc Yiso by the artist Chan-Kyoung Park. The text didn’t start off right away with analysis of the art work, but began by explaining the difficulty of ‘migration’ and then approached specific works from 1st level of interpretation to a deeper level of analysis which came from the critic’s subjective point of view. This example text illustrates that criticism is a tenacious and faithful analysis on the artist, and thus can be longer than other kinds of writing. Another way of writing would be to differentiate one’s writing style and demonstrate the writer’s uniqueness in writing criticism that reflects the artist’s style. A suitable example of this would be , a criticism on the works by Jae-hwan Joo by the art critic Jee-sook Beck. Rather than using the existing academic writing style of critics, Baek intentionally overuses slangs to accentuate characteristics of Joo’s light and kitschy works. Also, Baek continuously reflects on what the works express, and retains such element of pleasantness throughout the text in order not to counter the effect of the playfulness. As illustrated by the two example texts, concretely analyzing and reconstructing the writing style to reflect the artist’s style is a means through which the writer can interpret and write about art works through diverse ways.

3. The Creativity and Concreteness of Criticism
Besides the writing style and structure, experimentation forms of writing can also be a way through which criticism can itself be a creative work. An example of such text is “LeWitt in Progress”, the critical writing by Rosalind E. Krauss on the minimalist artist Sol LeWitt, written for October Vo. 6. The structure of this text seems to touch upon a mathematical dimension, from citing specific words to mentioning 3 typical American criticisms on Sol LeWitt. In the text, Samuel Beckett’s play Molloy is cited in every paragraph, and through this, Krauss indirectly suggests the process of Molloy becoming psychologically more interesting. Krauss’ intention lied on criticizing the destruction of regularity and intervention of chance in Come on Go by Sol LeWitt, which was a drawing for Samuel Beckett’s play. The lecture offered the opportunity to think about how critical writing can deviate from existing frame of criticism and to what extent it can be expanded with persuasive power.