2008-09-24

Greenwich Village Funeral Home

Though many people call me "creative," very rarely have I been considered "artistic." In fact, the only time I can recall being complimented in this manner (aside from first grade when my art teacher totally dug my scribbling capabilities) was when I contributed some tongue-in-cheek pieces to an art show in college. A hippy-dippy art major approached me and told me how much ey "loved my art," how I had a "unique voice," and "defied conventions." At first, I thought ey was bullshitting me, only for the art major to insist I was in fact "brilliant." Ey was particularly enamored with the poetry I had written on a long string of toilet paper, so I did not take the commendation seriously, although I can honestly say that toilet paper has been the most frequently used canvas for my artistic endeavors in the past several years.

If I were an artist, I was the least of them. Try as I might, I've never been much of a drawer, painter, sculptor, or bedazzler. I hoped all of this might change after I first acquired my digital camera about seven years ago. Since photography is a legitimate art form and does not appear to be too difficult, other than pointing and clicking, what really stood between me and and the career of a brilliant artist?

About a week after I received the camera, I took it with me on a trip to New York City with Alice and Jessica. I thought I could take some meaningful shots of the gritty city, but lacked the inspiration. Every potential subject seemed cliched, which is obviously not my style, as evidenced by the the toilet paper. Late at night, as we walked the streets, we encountered a funeral home with sad elderly people shuffling out. This scene could be my first legitimately artsy shot! As I reached for my pocket to grab my camera, both of my friends attempted to stop me, shaming me for exploiting a sad situation. I didn't share their viewpoint. Would you discourage the Tiananmen Square photographer for being invasive? I happen to find the tiny women comforting one another after the viewing to be quite touching.


A couple of weeks later, I replicated the resulting photo to share with others. It's been called "tacky," "tasteless," and "sick." Instead of garnering me artistic cred, this photograph has been cited as an example of my bad sense of humor and judgment. Nevertheless, I still like it, and I'm sure I could find you a hippy-dippy art major who would think it is "brilliant," too.

3 comments:

Unknown said...

Why do people condemn artwork associated around death? By the same token, what does a crucifix represent except mutilation and should therefore be considered grotesque.

I think your photo is beautiful, Kevvy. You're preserving a piece of history, not to mention human emotion and the ritualistic practices of our culture.

Anonymous said...

Ahem. I resent my representation in said story! Yes, I was at first repulsed that you were photographing the elderly leaving a funeral. And let's not forget that you were GIGGLING as this happened. This was no serious event for Kevo, my friends. However, I also indulged in a bit of voyeurism. I, too, took a photo of ye old Greenwich Funeral Home as well and blew it up to an 8 by 10 photo in the lab myself. So I think that my depiction as merely a friend attempting to stop you is inaccurate.

That is all.

Kevin said...

I might have giggled, but that doesn't make me anything short of serious, it just means I take satisfaction in my art.

I didn't know you had a photo of the same funeral home! Do you still have it?

I apologize for characterizing you incorrectly, but I only remember being chided.