Light Years: Conceptual Art and the Photograph, 1964-1977

by Matthew S. Witkovsky (Editor), Mark Godfrey (Contributor), Robin Kelsey (Contributor)

Photography played a critical role in conceptual art of the 1960s and 1970s, as artists turned to photography as both medium and subject matter. Light Years offers the first major survey of the key artists of this period who used photography to new and inventive ends. Whereas some employed photographic images to create slide projections, photographic canvases, and artists' books, others integrated them into sculptural assemblages and multimedia installations. This book highlights the work of acclaimed international artists such as Vito Acconci, John Baldessari, Mel Bochner, Sol LeWitt, Bruce Nauman, Giuseppe Penone, and Ed Ruscha.  Matthew Witkovsky's essay provides the larger context for photography within conceptual art, a theme that is further elaborated in texts by Mark Godfrey, Anne Rorimer, and Joshua Shannon. An essay by Robin Kelsey focuses on the pioneering work of John Baldessari in which he explored the element of chance, and an essay by Giuliano Sergio illuminates the lesser-known work of Arte Povera, an Italian movement that sought to dismantle established conventions in both the making and presentation of art.

Genres: Art, Photography

264 pages, Hardcover

First published January 31, 2012

Reviews

[Wayne · Rating 4 out of 5]

Conceptual photography is an important chapter in the history of photography and of art, but one that is not very well understood or appreciated by the public. The book and the show (which I didn't see) has a huge challenge in presenting and explaining ideas and does a great job of it. There are a lot of works in the book and while the essays present a good overview of the general themes, connecting artists and niches inside the conceptual movement, the short blurbs under the photos are most effective aspect of the book. The only negative is because of the overview nature of the show, the catalog doesn't go very deep into any one artist's work, but there is a good "further reading" section in the back.

[Joe · Rating 2 out of 5]

If you're thinking about getting an MFA in photography, read this book to find out if you can handle someone prattling on for 5 pages about a Douglas Huebler photo that's not very good. In all seriousness, this book does cover an important phase of photo history. The writing is informative but uninspiring.

[Daniel X.]

Great show, and a well-produced book. The essays, however, are lugubrious and fraught with expensive words.