Sunday, September 16, 2012


If you come across Elad Lassry’s work and leave a little perplexed, do not fear- it is the curiosity and imagination in ambivalence that he strives for. Untitled (Presence) is an installation consisting of film, photography and sculpture, discussing how framing devices influence analysis of a work. By oscillating perspectives through altered architecture, scattered patterns in images (hollywood portraits, still lives, abstract forms) and shifts from photography to sculpture, Lassry focuses less on the content of each individual image but the potential relationships created by arrangement. Photographs line the walls ranging from still lives to portraits. A wave-like sculpture in the center of the space can be viewed through a wall or more closely after walking around the wall. At first, there seems to be no relation between the varying imagery in the photographs and with the sculpture in the space. However, Lassry creates an open discussion model away from didacticism and linear thought so the viewer can make relationships between the objects for themselves. A conclusion of the work does not have to be of a singular path of thought, but of forking paths with conclusive potentials. It is not only the content in each image that makes the piece whole,  but the relationships with what is surrounding the image. Lassry leaves  the “meaning” of art  to the perceptive audience- a welcomed freedom.


  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

  2. The conclusion of this review is nice and intelligent, using the authority and expertise of a canonical artist, author or philosopher is a great way to help a critic more firmly assert his or her opinion or perspective. But this tactic is only successful after the critic has clearly and empirically described the artist work.

    Although, I think this review attempts to describe the exhibition space and the artwork the description is overwhelmed by flaws in syntax and poor word choice.

    By omitting non-relevant sentences and slightly changing the language, the introduction can be improved upon, For example:

    “Untitled (Presence) is an installation consisting of film, photography and sculpture. The artist alters the architectural layout of the space, allowing the gaze of the viewer to oscillate, between divergent and sporadically spaced themes, images, objects and mediums…
    General Guide lines that may help

    "You" may be the wrong term of address, perhaps "the viewer" would be a better term. As I imagine the critic is not talking to me as an individual person.

    The burden of proof is on the critic, this is “the challenge” - explain the work “objectively” empirically and clearly, contextualize or surmise the intent of the artist (without using anonymous hypotheticals) then give your closing thoughts or personal opinion.

    Assuming that the viewer will not understand an exhibit, is a strange way to start a review.

    You have a great vocabulary and your righting has personality, two things that are hard to teach.

    I look forward to your future reviews:)

  3. Your proposition that Elad Lassry strays away from a didactic approach to viewership was a great point. I would however have appreciated more concentration given to further descriptions about the actual work on display. While you captured the general feeling of what you take away from the show, there is some room for improvement in giving readers a more visual grasp of the experience. I also feel like some of the good points you are trying to convey get a little lost in your word choice. Simplifying certain phrases will allow readers to grasp your message more accurately.

    Overall though, I thought you did a great job!