Sunday, April 19, 2009

collage vs. montage

These two posts are quotes I found in a recent acquisition of the art and architecture library: Collage: Assembling Contemporary Art.

I was greatly inspired by both - the first one seems to justify some of my impulses, and the second relates collage to general issues of contemporary practice.....
DL: Suppose I suggest that collage foreshadows everything that is happening now, that now everything is a kind of collage, that it is a given, almost the only method available?

JS: I think that this has been the case for a while, but would use the word ‘montage’ rather than collage. Montage has become mainstream. It was radical in Eisenstein’s day, but now it is facilitated in the editing of color supplements, it is the cut and paste method that everyone uses, the standard way of working. I see collage as acting in opposition to that. It is an exposure of and a resistance to the seamlessness of montage. I see collage as the opposite – a desire to expose and to hold on to the seams whereas, in montage, the seam is hidden and universal.
Collage offers a perspective on the essential condition of the image in our culture: the existence of an image perpetually in relationship to another. This ‘other’ image is always apparent, and the image always strays between its own position and that of its ‘other.’ This awareness is kept to the borders of consciousness. We are never brought into confrontation with the edge between them

-Collage: Assembling Contemporary Art

No comments: