Comments on: On Aging, Absence and Angels

By: NW

NW — Sat, 02 Jun 2012 18:32:06 +0000

Spot on post – done with grace, humor and intelligence. When I saw the Woodman show, I couldn’t stop thinking of her caryatids. Thank you for articulating why so eloquently and with your usual originality.

By: Allison Unruh

Allison Unruh — Mon, 30 Apr 2012 22:25:19 +0000

How is it possible to be so analytically sharp, and at the same time deeply moving? Truly brilliant!

By: Michael George

Michael George — Tue, 10 Apr 2012 05:03:05 +0000

Really beautiful.

By: Tom

Tom — Fri, 06 Apr 2012 19:53:00 +0000

Shelley, your genius is showing, again. This seems the perfect form/forum for your special insights into the social history of artists and their art. You parse the the confluence of person and personae. Reproachful, forgiving and ultimately female (hardly girly, as you put it) your perspective clarifies, for this male, a different and rewarding way of understanding this work. We especially appreciate the moral implications of your closing comments, and we’re happy that you’re here!
T.

By: m

Fri, 06 Apr 2012 08:44:54 +0000

Dear Shelley, I knew Woodman’s pictures when I was in my 20s, so the same age of her when making photography. I felt shocked, body’s selfsconciousness was a question for me at this period and the same issues appeared just there, under my gaze on Wodman’s images. The question of aging and time is experienced diferently by men or women. Thank you for your sharp and intelligent article!
Best, MP

By: shelleyrice

shelleyrice — Wed, 04 Apr 2012 23:16:36 +0000

In reply to marta. You are welcome, Marta. And thank you for this wonderful opportunity!

By: marta

marta — Wed, 04 Apr 2012 22:46:21 +0000

Congratulations, dear Shelley, for this suggestive post! It is really clever how you articulate both Sherman and Woodman works contexts. Thank you.