Artist Intention and Evidence in a Work
Physical facts, the artist’s account and possible interpretations have different sources. Mare’s contour and lunar seas provide a case for distinguishing them.
What can be established from form
Mare’s documentation image shows a contour suggestive of long ears and an opening through the centre of the face. Recognising a rabbit differs from knowing why the artist used that reference. The former involves a viewer’s knowledge; the latter requires a record of intention.[1]
“An opening through the face” describes form, while “the opening signifies loss” adds interpretation. Identifying which form and account support a reading makes it possible to compare that reading with others.
Lunar seas and the work’s title
NASA describes lunar maria as low regions filled by ancient lava flows. Mare’s formal record connects the persistence of the name sea with later knowledge, using it to address relationships between visible form, memory and knowledge.[2][1]
The scientific account of terrain and the intention to use its name in a work have different sources. NASA supports the former and the artist’s formal record the latter. Whether a particular viewer associates the work with the Moon or a rabbit is another question.
Sources for describing a work
Work documentation supports descriptions of form and specification; the artist’s text supports an account of motive; a person’s actual words support an account of their interpretation. Keeping these sources distinct avoids reporting the artist’s account as everyone’s response or a possible reading as criticism that has actually been received.
This method does not make intention the only correct answer. It allows the relationship between text and form, and aspects not addressed by the text, to be examined with stated evidence. An introduction to a work can likewise distinguish factual description from interpretation.
| Account | Source |
|---|---|
| Form and specification | The work, drawings and formal records |
| Artist intention | Statements and making records by the artist |
| A person’s interpretation | Their actual words and the object encountered |
Descriptions that permit comparison between interpretations
Several possible interpretations do not mean that every account is equally supported. Recognising a rabbit in Mare can be examined against contour and title records; discussing Interdependence in relation to an earlier form can be examined against its rearranged halves. Comparison can identify the observation, evidence and point at which inference enters an account.
Establishing the artist’s intention is also distinct from excluding other experiences. A formal account documents making decisions, while the form remains available for reconsideration alongside that account. Keeping the two distinct permits discussion beyond either following the artist’s words alone or adding meanings without regard to evidence.
Sources
Documented works
Further articles
Erased de Kooning Drawing: Artist Accounts and Museum Interpretation
Does knowing the making process settle an interpretation? SFMOMA’s making references and artwork overview provide different kinds of evidence.
Is Maeose’s Depression a Mark of Damage?
A depression made as part of a vessel and a future chip are different states. Maeose and Chiaroscuro are compared through time before loss.
