cut-off
How much of ourselves is needed in a piece for it to be considered autobiographical?
When looking at Nothomb’s The Character of Rain, only a small three year fragment, only one of which she is conscious during comprises this autobiographical account. It must be only a sliver of the life of the individual.
When thinking about self-portraitures, they encompass an even smaller period of time. For example, Van Gogh and the work of other impressionists only encompassed the period of a moment. Likewise, his self-portraits were likely to have only captured one moment in his life.
Now think about the field of view of either an autobiography or a self-portrait. They cannot possibly cover every element, even, and thought in even that miniscule segment of their life-- nor would they want to.
I have actually done my own self-portrait in photography form, back in August when I first received my digital camera as a present from my grandpa.
It is one of those photos where I am holding the camera with one hand, and positioning it to take a picture of my body. It cuts off my face all of my face above my lower lip, most of my arms, and my legs. My body is in the center, wrapped in the contours of a corset. My description of the piece is as follows:
image copyright Karen Kim
Society's expectations is like a corset-- something about it attracts us, we give in to it and try it for ourselves, and eventually it shapes the very structure of our physical form into something more accepted and considered beautiful by the masses. We sacrifice comfort, individuality, full freedom and movement to be more accepted. Sometimes, I find myself giving in to it all as well...
The only part of myself I wished to reveal in this self-portrait was my susceptibility to the contouring of others. While it is a part of myself I was revealing, it was a self that was blending into others. I found it more appropriate to chop off my face than to leave it on.
But does leaving the portrait to be about such a narrow fragment of my life which could easily be the life of any other make this not a self-portrait at all? Don’t I generalize my view of self by specifically honing in on such a universal message? How much of ourselves is necessary to distinguish a piece as a self-portrait, or autobiographical, rather than a universal piece using myself as one of the many models?
Are themes such as conforming not a possible theme for a self-portrait?
The fact of the matter is mot people conform, to some degree. It is part of what allows society to function in an organized matter. So should an autobiography be focused in the aspects of self which are not conformed, and retain distinctive qualities? If these are the aspects outlined in an autobiographical piece, will the viewer be able to relate to it, and thus get something out of it?
Maybe it is like Patchett's work, Truth & Beauty where it shows who she is by hiding behind another. Patchett is a behind the scenes, don't focus on me but focus on who I am in connection to others type of person. Maybe in this piece I am a don't focus on me, but on how I connect to everyone else as a symbol. Don't see this as my picture, but a picture which tells something about human inclinations which I can relate to.
Sometimes what we don't see tells us more about a person than what we see. It shows the reservations a person has about themselves, their culture, and their values. For example, I would not likely ever describe what I do in the bathroom in my autobiographical pieces. My Korean culture is extremely conservative about such things, and I just can't imagine discussing such a thing, even though the bathroom plays a part in my everyday life. However, I might discuss the different of bathrooms in Korea and America based on my trip there, because the obvious lack of modernization in some areas in Korea are most obvious from this, and it is an obvious symbol. I would just distance it, by not describing my actions in the bathroom, but rather, what the bathroom set-up was, and my impressions of it, and the cultural significance of it.
image copyright Karen Kim
Also, this tendency to cut off faces and limit the viewers view of the subject is characteristic of my photography. Even before I received my camera, I would tend to cut my photos up in most public areas where I used the photo to identify myself as a person, such as my ID on deviantart.
image copyright Karen Kim. Featuring model Sandra Liu
In fact, I cut of the faces of artistic photos of my friends as well. I love how even if you cut off the face, the stance, posture, and features still reveal who it is you are looking at. As one of the reviewers of my piece of my friend Sandra said, he liked how I chopped of the head, and he could still tell that she was attractive.
When looking at Nothomb’s The Character of Rain, only a small three year fragment, only one of which she is conscious during comprises this autobiographical account. It must be only a sliver of the life of the individual.
When thinking about self-portraitures, they encompass an even smaller period of time. For example, Van Gogh and the work of other impressionists only encompassed the period of a moment. Likewise, his self-portraits were likely to have only captured one moment in his life.
Now think about the field of view of either an autobiography or a self-portrait. They cannot possibly cover every element, even, and thought in even that miniscule segment of their life-- nor would they want to.
I have actually done my own self-portrait in photography form, back in August when I first received my digital camera as a present from my grandpa.
It is one of those photos where I am holding the camera with one hand, and positioning it to take a picture of my body. It cuts off my face all of my face above my lower lip, most of my arms, and my legs. My body is in the center, wrapped in the contours of a corset. My description of the piece is as follows:
image copyright Karen KimSociety's expectations is like a corset-- something about it attracts us, we give in to it and try it for ourselves, and eventually it shapes the very structure of our physical form into something more accepted and considered beautiful by the masses. We sacrifice comfort, individuality, full freedom and movement to be more accepted. Sometimes, I find myself giving in to it all as well...
The only part of myself I wished to reveal in this self-portrait was my susceptibility to the contouring of others. While it is a part of myself I was revealing, it was a self that was blending into others. I found it more appropriate to chop off my face than to leave it on.
But does leaving the portrait to be about such a narrow fragment of my life which could easily be the life of any other make this not a self-portrait at all? Don’t I generalize my view of self by specifically honing in on such a universal message? How much of ourselves is necessary to distinguish a piece as a self-portrait, or autobiographical, rather than a universal piece using myself as one of the many models?
Are themes such as conforming not a possible theme for a self-portrait?
The fact of the matter is mot people conform, to some degree. It is part of what allows society to function in an organized matter. So should an autobiography be focused in the aspects of self which are not conformed, and retain distinctive qualities? If these are the aspects outlined in an autobiographical piece, will the viewer be able to relate to it, and thus get something out of it?
Maybe it is like Patchett's work, Truth & Beauty where it shows who she is by hiding behind another. Patchett is a behind the scenes, don't focus on me but focus on who I am in connection to others type of person. Maybe in this piece I am a don't focus on me, but on how I connect to everyone else as a symbol. Don't see this as my picture, but a picture which tells something about human inclinations which I can relate to.
Sometimes what we don't see tells us more about a person than what we see. It shows the reservations a person has about themselves, their culture, and their values. For example, I would not likely ever describe what I do in the bathroom in my autobiographical pieces. My Korean culture is extremely conservative about such things, and I just can't imagine discussing such a thing, even though the bathroom plays a part in my everyday life. However, I might discuss the different of bathrooms in Korea and America based on my trip there, because the obvious lack of modernization in some areas in Korea are most obvious from this, and it is an obvious symbol. I would just distance it, by not describing my actions in the bathroom, but rather, what the bathroom set-up was, and my impressions of it, and the cultural significance of it.
image copyright Karen KimAlso, this tendency to cut off faces and limit the viewers view of the subject is characteristic of my photography. Even before I received my camera, I would tend to cut my photos up in most public areas where I used the photo to identify myself as a person, such as my ID on deviantart.
image copyright Karen Kim. Featuring model Sandra LiuIn fact, I cut of the faces of artistic photos of my friends as well. I love how even if you cut off the face, the stance, posture, and features still reveal who it is you are looking at. As one of the reviewers of my piece of my friend Sandra said, he liked how I chopped of the head, and he could still tell that she was attractive.
