I was recently confused by the dictionary’s definition of collage:

1. a technique of composing a work of art by pasting on a single surface various materials not normally associated with one another, as newspaper clippings, parts of photographs, theater tickets, and fragments of an envelope.

2. a work of art produced by this technique. Compare assemblage*.

3. an assemblage or occurrence of diverse elements or fragments in unlikely or unexpected juxtaposition: The experimental play is a collage of sudden scene shifts, long monologues, musical interludes, and slapstick.

*assemblage (in fine art).  a sculptural technique of organizing or composing into a unified whole a group of unrelated and often fragmentary or discarded objects.  a work of art produced by this technique.

The part that is confusing that if a collage is the occurrence of diverse fragments in unlikely juxtaposition, then how is my work collage?  However, the etymology of collage is:

1919, from Fr. collage “a pasting,” from O.Fr. coller “to glue,” from Gk. kolla “glue.” Earliest reference is in Wyndham Lewis.

So according to the etymology my work is collage since the paper is, so to speak, glued.

Another concern that I have is that on several occasions people have asked me what I do to get the color in my work or what paint do I use.  But the paper is the color and there is no paint.  So if people who see the work in person have that confusion how is anyone who sees the work in a digital entry be able to see what is the picture and the image.  I hardly feel that it will be as compelling when not in person.

All that said, here are three photos that were taken at Pie’s house Sunday evening after the show:

Share on Facebook