2. Do you think there’s am element of narcissism or self-indulgence in focusing on your own identity in this way?
The typical signs of narcissism are an inflated sense of one’s own importance, a sense of entitlement, and vanity. I don’t think Woodman, Brotherus or Wearing display all of these traits though each displays enough of a hint of all three to warrant the accusation. I think Woodman believed she had something important to say, but it is not ‘Look at me!’ Brotherus similarly tells us about the human condition and not just about her condition. Wearing shows some sense of entitlement and perhaps vanity when she places herself in the same rank as Auguste Sanders. That seems to me to be for others to decide.
3. What’s the significance of Brotherus’ nakedness?
Brotherus lays her pain bare before us. When she’s not presenting her personal experience she’s placing herself in the tradition of art-history. She shows that there is not necessarily a discontinuity between painting and photography. They can both be about light, colour and the relation of objects in spaces.
4. Can such images work for an outsider without accompanying text?
The text, like the title or even simple attribution of a painting gives the viewer a way in. It claims a context for the work. When the author attaches words to an image he does not send the work alone and unprotected into the world. Even calling a work ‘Untitled’ makes you look at who the author was and this is sometimes enough. For example, this image by Tierney Gearon, is called ‘13 – Untitled’, which immediately places it in a context and gives the author some control over the way the work is perceived.
Text can make a huge difference but too much can turn an image into an illustration, unable to stand on its own two feet. For example, this picture of the doctor’s house on Spinalonga is not worth much by itself. Saying who it belonged to and relating it to Victoria Hislop’s book ‘The Island’ changes everything. Without the words the picture is stranded and devoid of meaning.
5. Do you think any of these artists are also addressing wider issues beyond the purely personal?
Some issues are more important than others. It is important for people to understand the issues around IVF treatment. It is important to see how people like Francesca Woodman can hide in plain sight. It is not so important but still informative in the world of art to push boundaries if only to discover where they are. For example, Tierney Gearon discovered one boundary and wrote this to describe the experience:
“I looked at my pictures today and tried to see the bad things in them that other people have seen. But I can’t. Some are describing them as pornographic, others are accusing me of exploiting my children’s innocence. I don’t understand how you can see anything but the purity of childhood. When the exhibition opened eight weeks ago, the Observer’s art critic, Laura Cumming, wrote that I had succeeded in capturing the way that a child would look at the world, almost as though I was a child myself. The exhibition got great press, and the whole experience has been positive – until last Thursday, when I went to the gallery to do an interview and found the police waiting for me. I was completely blown away. I even started joking around with the officers because I simply couldn’t believe it was happening. I don’t see sex in any of those prints, and if someone else reads that into them, then surely that is their issue, not mine.”(1)
(1) https://www.theguardian.com/society/2001/mar/13/childprotection