A Picture By Any Other Name

For years, I have wondered why so many "modern" artists leave their works untitled. Laziness? Elitism? Pandering to the broadest interpretation?

Numbering works is just as unhelpful.

1957-D No.1 by Clyfford Still

I have no idea what to do with Still's creation, and he does not help me.

I don't really need too much information to understand Manet's work, but it's nice to know they were having lunch, rather than just creating a triangle for love and composition.

Dejeuner Sur L'Herbe by Edouard Manet

Then today, I randomly picked up Theories of Modern Art: A Source Book for Artists and Critics. This is a book for those with short bursts of free time (like me), who love art and wonder what others think about it too. Luck brought me to page 565 and the section On Titles For Paintings.

"Whereas certain people start with a recollection or an experience and paint that experience, to some of us the act of doing it becomes the experience; so that we are not quite clear why we are engaged on a particular work. And because we are more interested in plastic matters than we are in a matter of words one can begin a picture and carry it through and stop it and do nothing about the title at all." - William Baziotes

Ok. I agree that some emotions and experiences are not easily communicated through words, and titles can seem limiting. But you have to try, so that the viewers can come on the journey with you and share and be engaged.

Or you can use titles to mess with us. I also like a good joke.

Fountain by Marcel Duchamp

.