It certainly resembles Diane Sawyer. As mere curators, it is ultimately impossible for us to know the true intentions of the artists. But we're also postmodernists, and so we reject the outmoded notion that the artist has any sort of monopoly on the work's interpretations. Which means that it could very well be Diane Sawyer. In fact, we are willing to concede that it is THE Diane Sawyer. One (potential) problem with that interpretation: Diane S. might not wear tiaras. We can't actually remember whether or not she wears an eyepatch. There is, of course, the distinct possibility that neither the eyepatch, nor the tiara are meant to be taken literally.
I think this must be a commentary on the paparazzi. This is obviously Princess Di (the hair and the tiara are perfect) trying in vain to hide from the media. Another brilliant drawing.
4 comments:
Diane Sawyer?
It certainly resembles Diane Sawyer. As mere curators, it is ultimately impossible for us to know the true intentions of the artists. But we're also postmodernists, and so we reject the outmoded notion that the artist has any sort of monopoly on the work's interpretations. Which means that it could very well be Diane Sawyer. In fact, we are willing to concede that it is THE Diane Sawyer. One (potential) problem with that interpretation: Diane S. might not wear tiaras. We can't actually remember whether or not she wears an eyepatch. There is, of course, the distinct possibility that neither the eyepatch, nor the tiara are meant to be taken literally.
I think this must be a commentary on the paparazzi. This is obviously Princess Di (the hair and the tiara are perfect) trying in vain to hide from the media. Another brilliant drawing.
Lady Catherine de Burgh
Post a Comment