There was a time, not so long ago, when A Painting re-pictured in a newspaper, journal or catalog would always and automatically be shown as completely cut away from The World.
Depending on the house style, it might also have an index number nearby or a brief description underneath. Sometimes, a more formal label: the name of the artist; the title given it by the artist; and perhaps a creation date. Additional information might include a set of measurements; names of certain of the physical materials used in the fabrication; names of previous owners of renown; a taxonomy category; certain jottings on the back (verso) and so on.
While that type of representation is still used, we are now also commonly presented with a formal projection-space framed in a theatrical archetypal tableau. bLOGOS/HA HA has commented previously on certain (likely) works of The Golden Guillotine which mimic this form ad absurdum. Also, the productions of the generalist Theatre of the Actors of Looking have been noted
The following two images accompanied (and are scanned from) the newsprint edition of an article in this weekend's The Australian. They illustrate this current fashion as performed for the top end of town and for those of the University burbs.
For the one, a stark and confronting work by ideogram (yet another of these 'infiltraitor' groups) : "What's black and white and faceless?".
For the other, same but different, all is downplayed in what appears to be a static staging of "A Stretch of the Imagination" with its Monk O'Neil university-of-hard-knocks type; its front-of-house behind-the-scenes white gloved stage hands turning their backs on the audience; and its in-your-face director in blue jeans, open shirt and hands in pockets.
