6

Dodge & Burn: The Photograms of Christina Price Washington

Written By Jill Frank on March 12, 2013 in Dodge & Burn

Dodge & Burn is back with a facelift! We’ve altered the column to now allow resident guest curators to respond to and contextualize lens-based media and artists using this platform. Our first curator is Jill Frank, a photo-based artist who recently moved from Chicago to Atlanta. She will be presenting Dodge & Burn every three weeks for the next few months, so check back in to learn more about Jill Frank through her curated content!


The Photograms of Christina Price Washington

Christina Price Washington—who has work in Suburbia, currently on view Hagedorn Foundation Gallery—is concurrently working on a different set of images that deal her “mistrust of the lens.” Christina places a piece of light sensitive photographic paper into her purse everyday, and allows her actions, objects and own touch create light-based compositions on the paper. Motivated in part by questions about the value and uniqueness of photographs, Washington said that the resulting photograms are imitating the objects in her purse.  Her process has an unusual anti-indexical relationship to the resulting composition—these works are very abstract and simultaneously feel both intimate and sterile.  Her unique photograms intersect with works by László Moholy-Nagy—or more recently, those of Walead Besthy. And while best seen in person, she has scanned them for easy viewing.

Christina Price Washington, No. 9 from the Series Twin of Lens-Based Photographs, 2013, 14 x 11 inches, silver gelatin print, courtesy of the artist.

 

Christina Price Washington, No. 17 from the Series Twin of Lens-Based Photographs, 2013, 10 x 8 inches, silver gelatin print, courtesy of the artist.

 

Christina Price Washington, No. 13 from the Series Twin of Lens-Based Photographs, 2013, 10 x 8 inches, silver gelatin print, courtesy of the artist.

 

Christina Price Washington, No. 11 from the Series Twin of Lens-Based Photographs, 2013, 10 x 8 inches, silver gelatin print, courtesy of the artist.

 

Christina Price Washington, No. 6 from the Series Twin of Lens-Based Photographs, 2013, 10 x 8 inches, silver gelatin print, courtesy of the artist.

 

Christina Price Washington, No. 4 from the Series Twin of Lens-Based Photographs, 2013, 14 x 11 inches, silver gelatin print, courtesy of the artist.

 


Christina Price Washington was born in Santa Barbara, CA and now resides in Atlanta, GA. In 1993, she received her BFA from the Atlanta College of Art, and in 2012 her MFA from Georgia State University. Washington has exhibited extensively throughout Atlanta, including at MOCA GA, Hagedorn Foundation Gallery, {Poem 88}, Eyedrum, Jennifer Schwartz Gallery and GSU. Her work reflects on the “fastidious, relentless pursuit of perfection played out in the houses and spaces,” left without any natural reference, on the edges of world cities. Washington’s lush renditions of suburban grounds and the light of empty homes reflect on both of these as objects of voyeuristic desire and of a detached techno urban coolness and emptiness that now confronts our entire culture.

Jill Frank is a visual artist working primarily in photography. In 2001, she received her BA in Photography from Bard College, and in 2008 her MFA in Studio Art from The School of the Art Institute of Chicago. Frank recently completed the SOMA residency in Mexico City and relocated from Chicago to Atlanta in 2011 to teach photography full-time at Georgia State University. Frank’s current projects explore the history of photographic representation by creating alternate versions of images that dominate the vernacular of Western culture. Her work has shown nationally and internationally, and recent awards include grants from The City of Chicago Community Art Assistance Program and The Kentucky Foundation for Women. Selected solo exhibitions include Contemporary Art Workshop, Chicago; Golden Gallery, Chicago; and the Museum of Contemporary Art, Chicago.


Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks

Category: Dodge & Burn |
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

  • Jason Francisco

    These are fascinating pieces, thank you for posting about them. To my eyes, they’re very much indexes in the familiar sense––it’s just that they’re indexes of processes and objects that cannot be reconstructed by looking at the resulting image. They’re intriguing for the ways they separate the cause and effect: the image is an effect that makes its cause more, not less mysterious.

  • Robin Bernat

    Congrats, Christina!

  • Beth Lilly

    Right on, Jason. The process speaks to the nature of image-making AND they are visually compelling. Well done Christina!

  • In Kyoung Chun

    I enjoyed a lot the article and your works! Congratulations, Christina!

  • Christina price washington

    Thank you Jill, and congratulations!

  • Dan Weiskopf

    I wonder whether indexicality is the right organizing concept for thinking about images like these. In a sufficiently broad sense, as Jason notes, everything is an index: chemical changes in exposed photosensitive surfaces, dents and scratches on my phone, and the wear patterns on my brake pads are all indexes, in that they are material traces of their causes. This is consistent with Peirce’s usage, which allows weathervanes and words to be indexes as well. If the index can absorb such diverse cases, then pointing out that these images are indexical may just amount to saying that they have causes. But what doesn’t? So they are anti-indexical in this sense: they show something about the limits of indexicality as a grounding term for photographs in general.

    It might be interesting to consider these works in terms of two oppositions: abstraction vs. representation and chance vs. intention. While the images are largely abstract, they often flirt with representing forms, or hover on the border of intelligible depiction. At the same time, they were produced by a random and unrecoverable sequence of events, not by design. Even knowing this, I find myself seeking out opportunities to interpret fragments of them in representational terms: as leaves, bones, torsos, shadowy skin, insects, chrome, and origami flowers.

    I know that these glimpses are just projections–not anything in the images themselves–and so this exploration or play is tied to nothing indexical. But this inspires two further thoughts. First, a lot of our ordinary seeing is apophenic in this way. It trades on our visual associations to construct patterns that may exist nowhere but in our own eyes. Second, though, the world itself may be rich with hidden images of just this kind, waiting to be exposed so that they can unfold into meaning under our gaze. This is why the purse is significant, I think; it suggests that we carry, or are surrounded by, just such invisible images all the time.

    Aside from their visual pleasures, then, I’d suggest that these images gain their power from the interplay between the abstract lack of design that the world offers us and the sense that we try to make out of it.