:: nothing like/influence the/no joe mojo/but possibly also/revolving daydream ::
::| an.exquisite.corpse : discussion : 18 |::
Another fantastic corpse. I have to say I've noticed that larger, bolder imagery seems to yield better corpse results. I still love seeing how people piece things together.
I'd also like to point out how cool it is to see a person's style emerge, or messages from one artist in between corpses. To single out Melanie, for instance. Easily recognizable pieces, with a definite style that when viewed consecutively form a picture of the artist. As an example, check out this, this, this and this. All have a central figure, with a certain duality cast on either side. I think it's wonderful to see.
michael at December 21, 2001 10:27 AM
*Gasp*
This is extraordinarily lovely. I love the balance between the cat and the fish, and the echoes between the sun with planets drawing and the gyroscopic earth. I'd especially like to commend Matt and Craig for their sections which stand on their own but are completely abstract in nature. But nice work, everyone.
And I can't help but giggle at the pager.
Casey at December 21, 2001 12:22 PM
It's the seams that intrigue me on this one -- each offers a stunning transition that then moves gracefully and cohesively through the panel!
mirla at December 21, 2001 12:23 PM
I agree, mirla - the seams are intriguing. I was wondering when the corpses would get around to being self-consciously creative about moving from section to section, rather than just matching seamlessly...this one marks a great transition into that realm.
heather at December 21, 2001 1:29 PM
Actually I beg to differ with Heather. The original corpse concept on folded paper involved making an attempt at a seamless human form, or getting as close as possible without communicating with the other participants. This collaborative submission departs from the original intent of the game.
They might as well be five separate works of art, as opposed to one work of art made collaboratively by five different people. This isn't in my opinion a great corpse compared to the others I've seen and that's precisely because of the self-conscious seam exposure. With due respect to the effort of the artists, I don't like this one.
ZachsMind at December 21, 2001 2:04 PM
I don't *get* the previous comment. A corpse is a corpse is a corpse. One of the wonderful things about this one is that all four seams are made part of the image in unsually creative ways. Doing this isn't intrinsically good or bad or a violation of the "rules" [???]. It made for a great corpse in this case. Congrats all around.
Sixtieslibber at December 21, 2001 3:01 PM
(~Thanks Casey.~)
I think I understand Zachsmind's comment about the feeling of 5 separate works of art vs. one collaborative work. I personally take no offense - art is in the eye of the beholder, etc.
However, at the same time, I also think that the nature of the corpses (corpsi?) on this site is inherently different from the traditional corpse in this manner: the nature of traditional corpse is to create an image of a body (hence, a corpse), while these do not follow that guideline, and only borrow from basis of the concept.
Therefore, if a corpse on this site seems cohesive in such a way that it seems "continuous", I think it is an artistic coincidence, given that there is no specific topic or guideline given up front except that which is suggested by a strip of 15 pixels... That is not to take away from the fact that sometimes there certainly does seem to be some kind of magic that happens with some of these corpses.
Personally, while not as stunning as some recently, I kind of like this one for reasons similar to many given in the comments above. (Though of course, I am biased.)
Happy Holidays to all.
Craig at December 21, 2001 5:49 PM
ZachsMind's comments speak to an idea that I've been considering for a while... I'm not sure that I share the same opinion... especially about this piece. I think that the transitions in this corpse are very good and contribute to it as a single, unified piece of artwork. Hooray for seamlessness.
Our departure from the original concept means a couple of things: we are not thematically bound, and and are likely to have very different results within each 200 pixel frame. This has been very interesting, as we've seen. The intersections between pieces become the 'collaborative' portions. Common themes are vague and unconscious at best.
Finally, while this kind of stream-of-consciousness artwork is cool and rewarding, it might also be interesting for indivdiual corpse-groups to arrive at a common theme before embarking upon a piece, as our surrealist predecessors did in theirs (A human form). How about it? Contact the other members of your next group before a tile has been submitted and suggest a theme. A machine? A landscape (consisting of the heavens, oceans, earth, and the subterreanean)?
Any other ideas?
Gabriel at December 21, 2001 6:35 PM
I'm not thrilled with this one myself.. it's nice, but not one of the better corpses.
I think the idea of a pre-selected theme is great, Gabriel, though I think that some should stay as a surprise to the artists. I did my section years ago (well, it feels that way), and the mystery of what it would be combined with kept me waiting in suspense.
Regarding the seams/seamless issue.. I prefer seamless corpses but I think the artist should be free to do what they want with their section, as long as they incorporate the section above in some way. Some of the transitions are very creative even though it's obvious when they start.
If you look at the examples from the original game on the explanation page, some of the sections (the bottom two on the image on the left, for example) fit with the others, but it's very apparent where one artist ends and the other begins.
Anyway, enough rambling...
in conclusion,
this corpse - good but not exciting, seams/seamless - artist's choice, artists chosing themes - interesting idea
Susan at December 21, 2001 7:23 PM
This is a little off topic, but I'd like to thank Phineas and Heather for launching this project earlier this year. In many ways, the timing couldn't have been better. The art has been inspirational, funny and/or cathartic during some very difficult times. Thanks for making something so unique for everyone to enjoy.
And HAPPY NEW YEAR everyone!
Melanie at December 22, 2001 1:26 PM
Well I like this one, and especially Susan's piece Melanie's as well. I guess they didn't have Photoshop in 1928, eh? That is a challenge. Whereas the original corpses used the strip above as a guideline, the artist's hand was apparent in each section, they probably couldn't nor wanted to copy the above style direct. With pixels, it's easy to match up the exact colour, texture - even as we see here to literally copy the pixels as an introduction to the next section. When the corpses started blending up nice, people really admired the seamless transitions (God knows I've never been too successful at them.) I think I see where some people are coming from. You do rather end up with five seperate pieces of art with no connection except the effort put into the seams - and perhaps a vague "surreal" theme. But imho that's a plus, it's cool seeing the differences or similarities that emerge. A pre-determined theme may make the pieces more similar in subject matter, but I don't think they would make them more stylelistically cohesive (if I understand ZacsMind's comment.)
It's important to remember that the original surrealists were not only artists, but all members of the same "club", politically and artistically. So they had a lot of the same influences and new ideas of the time. What's great about computer art is you can draw from the entire history of classical and modern themes, pop culture, and do things electronically that would be impossible on paper.
The only way I see to really make the works more Similar (if that was indeed a goal) would be to reveal more strips of the above section so the next person had more of an idea of the type of imagery used. To me, this would sort of ruin things. Maybe it's because I'm not a real graphic artist, but I don't have the interest or ability to try and incorporate another's style into my pieces.
Charles at December 22, 2001 2:01 PM
But here's a thought:
Maybe for the one-year anniversary or somesuch, those who are good at hand drawing could sign up and produce some "retro-corpses." Specify a medium(s), say pen-and-ink, pencil, conte crayon, etc, and a sketch pad. Scan your bit and send it to the next person (or maybe even slice the paper and send it snail mail? I don't know if we could trust people not to peek if we sent the whole thing . . .) Then the next person would use that as a reference. That may be interesting.
Charles at December 22, 2001 2:11 PM
Diving into the topic of conversation: I like seamless. I'm not as fond of the corpses that are less seamless. But then again, I don't devalue the ones I don't like since there are other aspects that are of particular interest to other viewers. The coincidental thing is that as I first looked at this corpse, I thought to myself, "wow, seamless, yet not seamless. excellent job!" The transitions between Matt, Melanie and Craig are my favorite, but I love the thing as a whole.
And to think, the only comment I was going to make was how much I like the fish targetted on the top left and the kitty cat on the bottom right looking up and to the left. hehehehe That's the coolest part of the whole thing if ya ask me. :o)
hilary at December 22, 2001 9:48 PM
The idea of all participants in a corpse starting with a theme is good. I'd recommend that choice should be for veterans only; groups consisting only of people who have each successfully run the gauntlet at least once or twice. Beginners shouldn't get a theme. Everyone should have to experience the restricted freedom of the present approach at least once.
About my previous point, in no way did I intend to insult the participants of this particular corpse, or the grand effort that has been made here. It is a good corpse. My point was just it's not one work of art. Its five works of art inside one frame. I understand that the original point of (nondigital) corpsing involved drawing a humanoid figure. The literal transfer to digital corpsing has necessitated some exploration from the original format. However, the intent is still to create one artwork. If seams are given less than lip service, there's no flow to the piece and it feels like less of a collaborative work. That's fine. If that's your goal. I just don't understand why in that case the separate submissions shouldn't remain separate, if there's no desire to meld them together. I just wouldn't want there to be a trend to stray away from the illusion of collaboration, cuz it would be like football players just kicking the ball around and no longer trying for points.
Oh pooh. Never mind. I can't find a way to word how I feel about this without just digging the hole deeper. So, whatever happens, happens. Besides, if ever I get a chance to participate in corpsing, my first several attempts are gonna suck due to lack of experience, and you guys can rip me a new one if that day comes. =)
ZachsMind at December 24, 2001 8:05 PM
A reminder to all: one of the best facets of our corpsing in the last few months is that we're building an on-line community devoted to investigating what art means to each of us individually, as well as culturally. I, for one, love reading the comments generated by each peice as much as I like poking through the images themselves.
Thank you to Phin and Heather both (who are bang-up chaps in the flesh if your contact with 'em has only been limited to the digital sphere) for giving us a truly grand forum for thought and play.
Bran at December 27, 2001 8:52 AM
I have always thought that digital graphic manipulation should be done only for web design purposes only and should not be considered works of art. Something is art in the sense that it takes your breath away and makes you want to stare at it for hours. The actual sky does that, but not a picture of the sky on a computer screen (even if it has a flying car in the middle of it). I was wrong. The corpses presented here make me want to look at them for hours, to examine its intricasies, to wonder, to drink in its artistry and beauty and soul. Great job everybody.
Rose at December 27, 2001 5:19 PM
What about passing along a common "element" to each participant? A shape, image, color, word, symbol, picture, mp3 theme song, breakfast cereal box, power point pie chart, whatever.
The element could be words describing a theme ... the number 4 ... a font ... a sticky note from your mother ... whatever. Participants could incorporate the element in some way, draw from the element as a concept, style, theme, or just completely ignore it.
Without a common theme/concept, this is all really just an exercise in seamless random art. I'm not saying that's bad, but what's wrong with more "deliberate design" and less random luck? A common element won't prevent anyone from doing whatever they really want to do.
Thomas at December 28, 2001 1:02 AM
Wow. All this from my original comment.
First of all, there were no rules beyond the purely technical when this game began, and that's what has made this the most fantastic fun, and more.
Second, for a long while, we've all been exceedingly supportive of each other, and not in any pandering sort of way, but with great depth and more than just lip service. I've loved that too.
Third, this IS a seamless corpse. Just look again. I frankly think it's one of the best ones. Each panel is a revelation of layout, color balance and concept. The corpse is very clean, almost Eastern in its serenity and balance. I like it a lot. It appeals to that part of me that loves order.
mirla at January 2, 2002 1:00 AM
Post a comment
An Exquisite Corpse is a collaborative experiment in the creation of visual art through the tapping of the collective unconscious...
{ read more }