Don't you hate it when a piece of art has the title of Untitled? I do. Is that the actual TITLE or is it just a statement that the artist has no idea what the piece is about? I would think that almost anything would be better: Blue Dots or Yellow Line (even if there isn't one, it would give the viewer something to think about). But it just isn't right to send a piece out into the world without a name. How would you like it if you didn't have a name?

This one still doesn't have a name, so I have still not put the facing on. It has not yet spoken, so I am waiting. You've seen it before, but I am not ready to release it into the world. (Not that you are not the world, but you know what I mean).

I prefer to give a piece a somewhat ambiguous name, or one that is open to interpretation. That way, the viewer can bring his/her own experiences and perceptions to the piece. Not always easy to come up with something, and sometimes you have to ask other people what they see; that can help you. But what they see has to resonate with you or neither you nor the piece will be happy.

This piece has a name, but when I posted it on Instagram, three people commented on what it reminded them of. Interesting, since what they saw has been a recurring visual theme in my work (without my thinking about it). So do I change the name? Or does it matter?

Do you have trouble (sometimes) giving your work a title? Do you have many Untitleds in your collection? Do you ask other people what they see and go with their suggestions?

With that, I am leaving shortly for Paducah. Have not been there in more than three years and it is way past time for a vacation from cleaning out closets! My next post will be from there. Yay!

 all text & images ©rayna gillman 2019