Yes, but, is it photography??

[JBrunner]

Absolutely fantastic. I don't know why you would think there would be a problem with this, but I am curious as to how large format photography was involved as an element in the production of this work, and if so why you choose use it. It is not photography, but it is very well seen digital art that apparently uses photography as an element.

The simple identity of medium and size is greatly appreciated, indeed, I could not have really imagined the scope and impact of the work without it.

Thanks for sharing.

[neil poulsen]

Is art supposed to make you think?

ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!

[Randy H]

"Office Paper, 2007
Digital C print, 6x8 feet

Depicts 30,000 reams of office paper, or 15 million sheets, equal to the amount of office paper consumed in the US every five minutes."

Just curious. Does this include the paper the images were/will be printed on? It is kinda hard to decry the evils of clear-cut timber practices from the top of a wooden crate.

[Phil Edmonds]

The more pertinent question is not 'is it photography' but 'is it any good'. Well if it's meant as a poster for some green cause then, well... we've seen this many times before but why be picky. If it's meant as art, then it fails on charges of triteness and shallowness.

Warhol's soup cans (and the many derivative works that followed) had the advantage of not telling you what to think, thereby clearing that art-bar of raising questions without forcing an answer down your throat. So now we have yet another rehashing of a 40 year old idea, but now considerably worse than the original(s), and yet another series of photomosaics.

For those who think it's a lot of work, or for those who want to make their own, just Google for photomosaics. But no, the lack of effort is not the offensive part: the lack of intelligence is. Seeing derivative work from Mr. Jordan is not a first, but who knew he could dumb others' work down as well as copy it?

[David A. Goldfarb]

If you're going to do this sort of thing, you might as well make a statement. How about Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Rove as a Mt. Rushmore mosaic composed of bleeding and dismembered bodies? That could garner some attention.

[John Flavell]

Yes, it is photography. And judging from the conversation here, it's very effective.

[paulr]

Just curious. Does this include the paper the images were/will be printed on? It is kinda hard to decry the evils of clear-cut timber practices from the top of a wooden crate.

Don't you think that's a bit of a specious argument? For one thing, it's a stretch to interpret a piece like that as saying "using paper is evil." If anything, the work seems to be commenting on colossal scale of industrialized production and consumption. Something we all participate in (Mr. Jordan included), but something represented much better by day-to-day mundane examples than by a very small edition piece of art on paper, no matter what its size.

I also think it's unhelpful to hold the messenger to higher standards than other people. I've never gotten a sense from Chris that he's preaching from a soap box, talking down to us, or considering himself separate from the problems he explores. I see him screaming out "look what we're doing!" not "look what YOU'RE doing."

I agree with everyone who finds work that's purely agitprop to be uninteresting. If the only thing going on in this work was a condemnation of industry, or capitalism, or humans, it would be a big yawn for me. Whether or not i agreed. But I see more going on. For one thing, the work is pretty. The graphic forms, the almost fractal looking repetition, the interplay of detail and textures at different scales, are all mesmerizing. There's a kind of terrible beauty. It's much like the experience of looking at New York City from an airplane or a high window. The scale of it is at the same time breathtaking and horrifying. It stands simultaneously as a monument to dozens of things that are admirable and regretable about our species.It doesn't offer the viewer any obvious explanations or answers. If it was Chris's intention to create simple propaganda, then I think he failed beautifully.

[tim atherton]

Is art supposed to make you think?

ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!

Great art is supposed to "grab you in a headlock, rough up your composure and then proceed in short order to re-arrange your sense of reality"

which may or may may not include thinking/re-thinking

[Al Seyle]

Well, it makes me glad we decided never to have children.

...and no, it's not "photography"--it's photographIC.

[Bruce Watson]

The problem, however, is not how much we consume - It's how many of us there are.

Exactly. This planet is well beyond it's "carrying capacity" for humans. And those who don't understand this will have it smack them over the head in the coming years.

The real problem is going to come down to food. Our agricultural productivity right now is very high, but it's based on cheap oil. The vast majority of fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides are based on oil. Mechanized farming runs on oil. Transporting food from where it's grown to where it's consumed by train, plane, and truck takes oil. Today in the USA, it takes a liter of oil to put a pound of beef on your table. What happens as the price of oil rises??? And if you haven't noticed, the price of a barrel of oil on the world market has doubled in the last few years, so this isn't a hypothetical "it's not going to happen in my lifetime" question. It most assuredly is happening in our lifetimes.

It's been estimated that agricultural productivity as been increased from 3-5x (depending on the crop) because of oil-based fertilizers and other products, oil powered machinery, and oil powered transportation. As the price of oil rises, so too does the cost of food. Either due to the price of oil alone, or through the cost of lowered productivity due to the lack of oil-based fertilizers and pesticides. While this is going on demand is rising because the population is increasing. Any way you look at it, this isn't going to be pretty.

Yet only China is putting in a good faith effort to curb its population. And even they say their population peak will occur several decades from now. The voluntary curbing of populations takes generations.

If Mr. Jordan's art makes anyone think about the vast amount of resources being consumed by humans and makes them think that maybe this is a bad idea with really bad ramifications, well, I'm all for it. It's pretty clear that we can't depend on governments or religions to guide us.

Precious few are willing to step up and call attention to the obvious. An amazing number of these are artists.