wood, rope and aluminum
22"l x 17"w x 5"h
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
Georgie's Turn
http://www.youtube.com/watch?
1.) What is art therapy? The use of a creative outlet to psychoanalyze.
2.) Does your art making relate to therapy at all? If so, how? No, the motivation for making my work is not an emotional outlet.
3.) How do you feel art therapy can help someone with special needs? I think, not feel, that it would help someone with special needs because it is another means of expression, someone with special needs may not be able to express themselves verbally. Why would art therapy be the most appropriate method? Because other methods have been exhausted.
4.) Have you ever used art making (painting, drawing, photography, etc) as a way to deal with a personal issue? Please explain. No.
5.) Do you think, as an artist, we have any responsibility to help others deal with problems through art? No.
6.) Can you see any kind of relationship between this video and how I approach my artwork? Other than that you approach your work intuitively and emotionally, not really.
7.) Do you think any of my work is therapeutic? I think you may think of it that way, but only because of the article you chose and the questions you are posing.
8.) Do you think my art will change when I leave school? I think that it may, but I am not sure what that has to do with art therapy.
2.) Does your art making relate to therapy at all? If so, how? No, the motivation for making my work is not an emotional outlet.
3.) How do you feel art therapy can help someone with special needs? I think, not feel, that it would help someone with special needs because it is another means of expression, someone with special needs may not be able to express themselves verbally. Why would art therapy be the most appropriate method? Because other methods have been exhausted.
4.) Have you ever used art making (painting, drawing, photography, etc) as a way to deal with a personal issue? Please explain. No.
5.) Do you think, as an artist, we have any responsibility to help others deal with problems through art? No.
6.) Can you see any kind of relationship between this video and how I approach my artwork? Other than that you approach your work intuitively and emotionally, not really.
7.) Do you think any of my work is therapeutic? I think you may think of it that way, but only because of the article you chose and the questions you are posing.
8.) Do you think my art will change when I leave school? I think that it may, but I am not sure what that has to do with art therapy.
Robbie's article
1.) Did you find any similarities between the reading and the youtube video? Yes
2.) Do you believe that attempting to remove certain tenets embedded deep within our society is an important aspect to the advancement of the human condition? I think it is natural for us to question them, the evolution of society as a collective removes them.
3.) Are there any examples of people considered to be insane for their attempt to remove unnecessary beliefs within our society? Sure
4.) Andrei Tarkovsky expresses the fact that you cannot force others to feel certain emotions, and that you may not experience life through anything other than your own personal experiences. Do you believe that this statement is beneficial to the creation of art? I don't make work based off of emotions, so no.
5.) Do you agree, or disagree, with the opinions that Andrei Tarkovsky expresses about his view on art? Why? It is natural to make work around your own experiences, but it is not necessary for your experiences to be oppressive or hardening for you to make work, it just depends on the type of work that you are making or wanting to view.
6.) Do you find a similarity between my work and any of the information that I have presented to you? I think that you make work from a very personal and emotion state, but I also think that that comes through solely when talking to you about your work, there is not as much evidence when viewing the work.
7.) Are there any similarities between the work that you create and the presented information? My work stemmed from experiences, but does not stay on that platform.
8.) Is everything going to be okay? No. It will be better or worse, but that depends on you.
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
Dr. Hollinger's Article and Questions
reading/film for my discussion:
http://www.susansontag.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?
I would like to talk about both provided as I have structured my
questions that way.
Questions:
1. What, if any, are the similarities/differences of a slow, meditative medium such as drawing/painting compared to an instant appropriation tool such as photography? Would you consider a photograph an object, as you would a painting/sculpture? I think that it is the hand in the medium that determines the speed in the process, not the nature of the medium. For example, it may take a photographer hours to set up a shot, they meticulously go over every detail of the "stage", each color and texture, etc. And a painter, may be able to complete a painting in half and hour with more emphasis on immediacy and reaction. It depends on what is done with the photograph, sometimes I look at it as an image, sometimes I can see it as an object, but that is the same with a painting or sculpture as well.
2. What is the “message” of a photographic record? It is the idea of rememory and time, importance and exactness.
3. Would you consider “amateurism” when using a medium, an advantage or a disadvantage, while producing work? For example, is photo-realistic drawing the top of the heap? Does that knowledge/technique get in the way of some-sort of innocence/potential for inspiration? I think it is always better to have the knowledge, but it is also better to attain that knowledge for yourself even if you end up having others execute all or some portion of your work. I wouldn't consider you an amateur even in taking on a new medium such as silk screening, it is a new process but when it comes to the work, you are well aquatinted with understanding, producing and discussing your work.
4. In the film, The Blood of a Poet by Jean Cocteau, what images/sequences of voyeurism appear in the film? The idea of voyeurism comes up in the final section of the film. Does this have a relationship to photography as appropriation? I don't see photography as appropriation, unless it is an appropriation of an idea, but not as a moment or of an image in the real.
5. What does it mean psychologically when the theatre party applauds the death of the card shark? What does it mean, when viewing it as an artist? I am not entirely sure, but I thought of it as an idea of submission, as in to fate or dealt hands. He lost even when playing falsely, so his submission was praised by the audience. It also adds humanity to the viewer, they didn't like that not only the card player were violated but also the dead boy.
6. At what time does a highly personal, private, disgusting or elegant moment or event, becomes a spectacle? (Please refer to # 4 & #5) I think when you are doing something solely or solely motivated by the viewer or audience that it has become a spectacle.
7. (Made in 1930) Jean Cocteau uses several surrealistic motifs throughout the film, which is simultaneously intermixed with personal iconography. What about my work is self referential, and at the same time referencing the time in which we are living? Your archive of images is a set of documentation of a class within our generation, I think there is motif in your figure choices, but I think that the use of repetition in your form allows for subtle changes to be noticed and understood rather than it being singularly self referential.
8. Over the past two years, I have produced an extensive archive of images, with 35mm film only. What do you consider to be the differences between shooting in a digital format, and any sort of film format? I think that film slows you down and makes you look more, it makes each image thoughtful.
9. What are your observed advantages for me using photographic processes? The poetry in your work comes during the editing of your photographs, it allows you to grab and image and save it for later.
10. How hot is Lee Miller? She is way hot, we are talking like 3rd degree burns here!
http://www.susansontag.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?
I would like to talk about both provided as I have structured my
questions that way.
Questions:
1. What, if any, are the similarities/differences of a slow, meditative medium such as drawing/painting compared to an instant appropriation tool such as photography? Would you consider a photograph an object, as you would a painting/sculpture? I think that it is the hand in the medium that determines the speed in the process, not the nature of the medium. For example, it may take a photographer hours to set up a shot, they meticulously go over every detail of the "stage", each color and texture, etc. And a painter, may be able to complete a painting in half and hour with more emphasis on immediacy and reaction. It depends on what is done with the photograph, sometimes I look at it as an image, sometimes I can see it as an object, but that is the same with a painting or sculpture as well.
2. What is the “message” of a photographic record? It is the idea of rememory and time, importance and exactness.
3. Would you consider “amateurism” when using a medium, an advantage or a disadvantage, while producing work? For example, is photo-realistic drawing the top of the heap? Does that knowledge/technique get in the way of some-sort of innocence/potential for inspiration? I think it is always better to have the knowledge, but it is also better to attain that knowledge for yourself even if you end up having others execute all or some portion of your work. I wouldn't consider you an amateur even in taking on a new medium such as silk screening, it is a new process but when it comes to the work, you are well aquatinted with understanding, producing and discussing your work.
4. In the film, The Blood of a Poet by Jean Cocteau, what images/sequences of voyeurism appear in the film? The idea of voyeurism comes up in the final section of the film. Does this have a relationship to photography as appropriation? I don't see photography as appropriation, unless it is an appropriation of an idea, but not as a moment or of an image in the real.
5. What does it mean psychologically when the theatre party applauds the death of the card shark? What does it mean, when viewing it as an artist? I am not entirely sure, but I thought of it as an idea of submission, as in to fate or dealt hands. He lost even when playing falsely, so his submission was praised by the audience. It also adds humanity to the viewer, they didn't like that not only the card player were violated but also the dead boy.
6. At what time does a highly personal, private, disgusting or elegant moment or event, becomes a spectacle? (Please refer to # 4 & #5) I think when you are doing something solely or solely motivated by the viewer or audience that it has become a spectacle.
7. (Made in 1930) Jean Cocteau uses several surrealistic motifs throughout the film, which is simultaneously intermixed with personal iconography. What about my work is self referential, and at the same time referencing the time in which we are living? Your archive of images is a set of documentation of a class within our generation, I think there is motif in your figure choices, but I think that the use of repetition in your form allows for subtle changes to be noticed and understood rather than it being singularly self referential.
8. Over the past two years, I have produced an extensive archive of images, with 35mm film only. What do you consider to be the differences between shooting in a digital format, and any sort of film format? I think that film slows you down and makes you look more, it makes each image thoughtful.
9. What are your observed advantages for me using photographic processes? The poetry in your work comes during the editing of your photographs, it allows you to grab and image and save it for later.
10. How hot is Lee Miller? She is way hot, we are talking like 3rd degree burns here!
Batman/Paul's Questions
"What's Wrong With Contemporary Art?"
This is available on Google Books. read pages 28-33.
Questions
1. Is the author of this book being overly simplistic? Define overly simplistic? Every author has to define an idea through words it is what they do, words put restrictions on ideas. But yes, he is breaking down to the simplest idea.
2. Is the author being overly cynical? Yes, a bit, "THi sis how art history is used: not as open enquiry, but in order to give recent art a legitimizing historical lineage and to reinforce the notion that art is nothing more than a variety of rational discourse about social issues." and "All they (young student artists) need is the right look and the ability to attract attention to themselves. A deal with a commercial gallery can be expected follow and their careers are off to a flying start. From that magical beginning, most of them will never recover."
3. Can you be cynical and paranoid and still be correct in your assertions concerning matters that are highly subjective? Sure, but I don't think that he is correct in all of his assertions. His ideas on how the phd in studio art works/doesn't work, I can see how this would be an issue for your process but fit perfectly with mine, so it can not be a completely thoughtful structure.
4. Since "group think" is not only entrenched in the art world but the real world, should it not be encouraged in art school ? I think it shows up in art school, but that is natural and happens in these settings, it shouldn't be discouraged but always challenged.
5. Does the fine arts department at Ringling College of Art and Design represent a microcosm of the Art World? Hahah, I don't think so, maybe the first level of it's structure, but none of us get turned away from showing at the Crossley gallery and there is not a distinctive difference between those who succeed and those who are failing, even when those who are failing are doing so because of a tangible thing (such as they have not produced work or have not done required writings, etc)
6. As stated in the reading "does privileging words over visual expression encourage a narrowly didactic approach to art making?" This goes back to the questions, when is the art "made", when the idea is had, put into a sketch, when you have the physical object? when that object is accepted? But yes, I think it can.
7. Is Automatism or any other intuitive approach discouraged in contemporary art academia? I think more analytical work is encouraged but that more intuitive work is accepted as long as it is supported by thoughtful dissection of purpose, intent, motivation, etc.
8. Do you believe my work would have been better served had I not attended art college? No, I think that there are a lot of really good studio practices that you have figured out about your way of working, process, restraints, experiences, etc, that have really enhanced your work and I am not sure you would have gotten there as quickly without being in this setting. It may have taken you more than a decade outside of this setting.
9. Do you believe my work to be self indulgent? A bit, but I indulge in it as well. All of our work is a bit. We make something and then say hey, look at this thing I have made. It is part of the experience.
10. If all art is self indulgent to a certain extent, should I not embrace this approach? Do it, I support that, but I also know that you will continue to read and think about work because that is the type of person you are, so I know that won't be lost in the work.
11. Does the "it's all about me" approach to my work alienate you the viewer? Not when they can relate to you. Maybe we should alienate the viewer occasionally.
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Rachael's reading
Attached is the entire book The Singularity is Near - When Humans Transcend Biologyby Ray Kurzweil
I am asking that you read Chapter 7: Ich bin ein Singularitarian
and/or
watch this video
http://www.vbs.tv/watch/
Would you like to be able to live as long as you wanted? If so, approximately how long do you think you would want to live? If not, what would be your preferred method of death? I would love to live forever. I think that I am overly concerned with time, it is something that I think about daily, time in the bigger since, how much time we have, what is the most important thing to do with that time. What will how I used my time say, mean, leave? If that mindset was not something I had a continual presence in, then I think that would open up a great deal of freedoms that would be invaluable.
Do you think that it will be possible for machines to have consciousness in the future? Is there a fundamental difference between humans and machines that will always remain? There is definitely a fundamental difference between humans and machines that will always remain, but that doesn't discount the possibility for machines to have a consciousness, that is not enough for them to be human. The ability to freely think and respond isn't the only criteria for being human.
What do you think about Kurzweil's predictions? Do you think he is valid, totally crazy, or somewhere in between? I think that most predictions are crazy, especially when there are wide leaps from point A to point B, which is where Kurzweil falls. But they are sure entertaining.
Do you think it is important for humans to continue on a quest for more intelligent and faster technology? I think it is important to continue to advance as long as we are stopping to ask not can we do it but should we do it.
Do you think it is important for you to understand and communicate with machines/technology/tools in order to make art? Fifteen years ago, no. But I think that as technology, tools, and machines become exceedingly apart of our everyday lives it is important to understand their benefits and limitations, to not disregard them. It is important because starting from a place that you encounter in the real will make the non-real, to an extent, approachable.
Do you see any connection between this reading and the things that I make? Yes, you are literally making machines that extend your hand, but they are also not fully realized without that human connection.
Do you think it is important to think about the future, and to make predictions about technology? Do you think that artwork relating to this subject will effect the possible outcome of the future? Self-fullfiled prophecy and all, it starts with an idea. Everything does, so in making predictions or coming up with ideas leads to advances. It is important, yes, but it is also important to continue to question it.
Is this subject at all interesting to you? Yes, in the sense that I enjoyed the article/video/discussion/answering your questions, but it is not something that i regularly think about.
I am asking that you read Chapter 7: Ich bin ein Singularitarian
and/or
watch this video
http://www.vbs.tv/watch/
Would you like to be able to live as long as you wanted? If so, approximately how long do you think you would want to live? If not, what would be your preferred method of death? I would love to live forever. I think that I am overly concerned with time, it is something that I think about daily, time in the bigger since, how much time we have, what is the most important thing to do with that time. What will how I used my time say, mean, leave? If that mindset was not something I had a continual presence in, then I think that would open up a great deal of freedoms that would be invaluable.
Do you think that it will be possible for machines to have consciousness in the future? Is there a fundamental difference between humans and machines that will always remain? There is definitely a fundamental difference between humans and machines that will always remain, but that doesn't discount the possibility for machines to have a consciousness, that is not enough for them to be human. The ability to freely think and respond isn't the only criteria for being human.
What do you think about Kurzweil's predictions? Do you think he is valid, totally crazy, or somewhere in between? I think that most predictions are crazy, especially when there are wide leaps from point A to point B, which is where Kurzweil falls. But they are sure entertaining.
Do you think it is important for humans to continue on a quest for more intelligent and faster technology? I think it is important to continue to advance as long as we are stopping to ask not can we do it but should we do it.
Do you think it is important for you to understand and communicate with machines/technology/tools in order to make art? Fifteen years ago, no. But I think that as technology, tools, and machines become exceedingly apart of our everyday lives it is important to understand their benefits and limitations, to not disregard them. It is important because starting from a place that you encounter in the real will make the non-real, to an extent, approachable.
Do you see any connection between this reading and the things that I make? Yes, you are literally making machines that extend your hand, but they are also not fully realized without that human connection.
Do you think it is important to think about the future, and to make predictions about technology? Do you think that artwork relating to this subject will effect the possible outcome of the future? Self-fullfiled prophecy and all, it starts with an idea. Everything does, so in making predictions or coming up with ideas leads to advances. It is important, yes, but it is also important to continue to question it.
Is this subject at all interesting to you? Yes, in the sense that I enjoyed the article/video/discussion/answering your questions, but it is not something that i regularly think about.
Treavor's Reading
Questions:
1.) Do you think any of Graham Handcock's idea's in the video are plausible? Which ones, why? I think that this is more related to science fiction, key emphasis on the fiction.
2.) What "state of mind" do you mainly make your art in? Mainly, I would say a very focused and meticulous state of mind, very much in the present of what I am physically making. But that also makes me think at what point is it made, when I have the idea? When I have the sketch? When I have the art object? Which is most valuable?
3.) What do you think extraterrestrial alien art would look like, and/or what do you think extraterrestrial aliens would think of your art? I think that theirs would be just like ours, but not visually. Theirs would start with what they know and see. I think that their artwork would tell us just as much about them as any culture's work does and vice versa.
4.) Do you believe its possible that quantum physics and spirituality are connected in anyway? There was this article that I read that talked about how there were these micro cells that created a very distinct pattern. The scientists who discovered them found out that artists had been creating tapestries with the same exact pattern hundreds of years before the technology was available.
______________________________
!.) Do you think Graham Handcocks ideas relate to what I am making at all? To an extent, yes, but i don't think that you think about the work you make in that same way as you are making it. If anything, it is what you are discovering after making and then making again.
@.) Do any of his idea relate to what i have talked about? Sure, but especially in your understanding of why you are making.
#) Can you relate to my drawings? Yes, I can find aspects of your drawing that I feel like I completely grasp and can touch and understand. But there are also aspects that hit me from left field, but that is why you make the next one, we get clues as the viewer as to how to approach them.
$) Do you think the process of drawing relates to the idea of DNA being a device that passes on code? I think the process of drawing relates to the repeated image in DNA. As in, to understand the drawing you look at the lines of code to decipher the language.
Sandra's article
Here it is.
http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/
Supplimental reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
http://www.urbandictionary.
1. How would you feel and what would you do if your performance piece became an internet meme? Oh god, I would try to put out work that i felt gives a better representation of me, but I also am careful about what I put "out there".
2. People have created re-mixes of this performance, as well as images--most if not all a parody of this piece. As you view this article, do those images change how you regard the initial experience of the performance? Do they inform the work, or do they dismantle it? I think they inform more about the viewer than the initial performer. I think how some people spend , or rather throw away, their time and what they find important puts a bad taste in my mouth.
3. If you just witnessed a performance piece that you do not understand or do not enjoy, would you applaud? Does the level of guts it takes to do a performance {like doing anything of a socially unacceptable nature} play into it? If so, why should it? I would have to be really bad for me not to applaud, I think that it is polite to applaud, but I am not always polite.
4. So! Apparently you're a hipster! Are you going to try and prove them wrong or will you resign to the definition this anonymous society has given you? At this point, I am not interested in what society or peers define me as, I am more interested in how i am defining myself, this will probably have adjustments in the future, especially when/if critics write about me/my work.
5. Does this make you any more or less apprehensive about putting your work online? I don't like to put my work on facebook or even really on blogs, we are required to for this class, which bothers me because anyone can pull an image of mine off the site. It is harder to do when it is on my website because of the (c).
6. Can an artist recover his or her respect from this kind of publicity with time? Do you think it matters in the art world? The art world changes with the seasons, some people wait until late December to buy a winter coat.
7. Do I seem to be consciously careful not to gain that sort of attention from the audience that views my work? I think you avoid it to an extent but I also think that the quality of your work is what will ultimately dictate that, not where it is viewed.
8. What does my choice of this article tell you about me or my work? I think that you take your work very seriously, I think that you are in no means a film maker but a maker of art, do you have everything figured out yet? No, but if any of us did, we wouldn't need to be here.
http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/
Supplimental reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
http://www.urbandictionary.
1. How would you feel and what would you do if your performance piece became an internet meme? Oh god, I would try to put out work that i felt gives a better representation of me, but I also am careful about what I put "out there".
2. People have created re-mixes of this performance, as well as images--most if not all a parody of this piece. As you view this article, do those images change how you regard the initial experience of the performance? Do they inform the work, or do they dismantle it? I think they inform more about the viewer than the initial performer. I think how some people spend , or rather throw away, their time and what they find important puts a bad taste in my mouth.
3. If you just witnessed a performance piece that you do not understand or do not enjoy, would you applaud? Does the level of guts it takes to do a performance {like doing anything of a socially unacceptable nature} play into it? If so, why should it? I would have to be really bad for me not to applaud, I think that it is polite to applaud, but I am not always polite.
4. So! Apparently you're a hipster! Are you going to try and prove them wrong or will you resign to the definition this anonymous society has given you? At this point, I am not interested in what society or peers define me as, I am more interested in how i am defining myself, this will probably have adjustments in the future, especially when/if critics write about me/my work.
5. Does this make you any more or less apprehensive about putting your work online? I don't like to put my work on facebook or even really on blogs, we are required to for this class, which bothers me because anyone can pull an image of mine off the site. It is harder to do when it is on my website because of the (c).
6. Can an artist recover his or her respect from this kind of publicity with time? Do you think it matters in the art world? The art world changes with the seasons, some people wait until late December to buy a winter coat.
7. Do I seem to be consciously careful not to gain that sort of attention from the audience that views my work? I think you avoid it to an extent but I also think that the quality of your work is what will ultimately dictate that, not where it is viewed.
8. What does my choice of this article tell you about me or my work? I think that you take your work very seriously, I think that you are in no means a film maker but a maker of art, do you have everything figured out yet? No, but if any of us did, we wouldn't need to be here.
Justine's article
link to article/reading:
Questions concerning the article:
Could fashion ever be art? No. They both influence each other, definitely, fashion is artistic, definitely, art can talk about fashion, definitely, but there would be no need to differentiate between the two if they were the same.
In order for fashion to even be considered art would it have to be painted or would we have to stop wearing clothes altogether or would it have to be something else entirely? Yes, No, All of the Above, None of the above, it depends on the piece, it depends on the intention, it depends on the setting and it depends on the motivation.
Is there a way that fashion could be conceptual? Of course, I think that fashion can be highly conceptual, it goes beyond functionality it goes beyond practicality and it goes beyond wearability.
Could fashion be displayed as sculpture even if it’s still wearable? It depends on the piece, it can be displayed any way the artist or designer wants to display it, but that doesn't mean it is art.
Questions concerning my work:
Because I’m making dresses out of tissue paper does that automatically make me more of a feminist artist? No
If my dresses weren’t wearable, what would that make them? Would they still be considered fashion? I don't consider them fashion now.
If I wanted my dresses to be less fashionable, is there a way that I could display them to make them so? Again, I don't think of them as fashionable.
Arun's article
Here's what I wanted to put up for discussion next week: http://www.sidebarnation.com/
It's an audio interview, about an hour and a half long. The first 8 minutes is mostly just the show intro, so you can skip to the 8:11 mark of the file and get straight into the interview. Most of my questions come from the first 45 minutes or so of the interview, but I'd highly recommend listening to the whole thing if you can.
Here are the questions I wrote based on this:
1. Trevor von Eeden said that he learned to develop his own style by studying his own doodles. What sort of things have you observed about your own practice that you've been able to more consciously apply to your own work? I did a drawing entitled "Must be 54" to Ride", that drawing and approached helped me to figure out what kind of style I am interested in working in, it also helped me to understand what it takes for me to sit still and make a dense and detailed drawing.
2. "By making the extraordinary ordinary, it elevates your spirit." Is there an artist for you that you think exemplifies the sort of ideals von Eeden attributed to Neal Adams (similar to his analogy of what Bruce Lee would mean to a martial artist)? I don't know how to answer this question, there is very little that I find able to define as extraordinary or ordinary.
3. Von Eeden's work in comics developed independent of fan reaction. Has viewer response had an influence on your work? How much? I am extremely interested in the viewers response but I don't think that it influences my work, or if it does, it is indirectly and in the next piece.
4. What's more satisfying: the work? Or the piece that work produces? The work, always the work, there is satisfaction that comes in the final piece, but it is short lived. The work however is a continual satisfaction.
5. Does my work tell you anything about me/my experiences? I think that you are an observer, I would love to see what happens with your work when you become more selective of what you put on paper and you are in a completely new environment.
6. Do you think those experiences/personal biography is even relevant to what I produce? I don't see them in your work, they may be relevant to your motivation but motivation and concept are not related.
7. "...I'll never stop seeing my mistakes." Does my constant self-criticism of my own work affect your opinion of a piece I've done? No, I think that we are all our hardest critics and when we stop being so that is when we will stop making.
It's an audio interview, about an hour and a half long. The first 8 minutes is mostly just the show intro, so you can skip to the 8:11 mark of the file and get straight into the interview. Most of my questions come from the first 45 minutes or so of the interview, but I'd highly recommend listening to the whole thing if you can.
Here are the questions I wrote based on this:
1. Trevor von Eeden said that he learned to develop his own style by studying his own doodles. What sort of things have you observed about your own practice that you've been able to more consciously apply to your own work? I did a drawing entitled "Must be 54" to Ride", that drawing and approached helped me to figure out what kind of style I am interested in working in, it also helped me to understand what it takes for me to sit still and make a dense and detailed drawing.
2. "By making the extraordinary ordinary, it elevates your spirit." Is there an artist for you that you think exemplifies the sort of ideals von Eeden attributed to Neal Adams (similar to his analogy of what Bruce Lee would mean to a martial artist)? I don't know how to answer this question, there is very little that I find able to define as extraordinary or ordinary.
3. Von Eeden's work in comics developed independent of fan reaction. Has viewer response had an influence on your work? How much? I am extremely interested in the viewers response but I don't think that it influences my work, or if it does, it is indirectly and in the next piece.
4. What's more satisfying: the work? Or the piece that work produces? The work, always the work, there is satisfaction that comes in the final piece, but it is short lived. The work however is a continual satisfaction.
5. Does my work tell you anything about me/my experiences? I think that you are an observer, I would love to see what happens with your work when you become more selective of what you put on paper and you are in a completely new environment.
6. Do you think those experiences/personal biography is even relevant to what I produce? I don't see them in your work, they may be relevant to your motivation but motivation and concept are not related.
7. "...I'll never stop seeing my mistakes." Does my constant self-criticism of my own work affect your opinion of a piece I've done? No, I think that we are all our hardest critics and when we stop being so that is when we will stop making.
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Response to Alex's article
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/
1. How important is the process of destroying something ( personal object/ mental image/photograph) to create a piece of work that is abstract? I think that the point of abstracting is to find something new and worth highlighting in the original that was not able to be seen, I don't think it has to do with destroying but more so with looking through a new lens.
1. How important is the process of destroying something ( personal object/ mental image/photograph) to create a piece of work that is abstract? I think that the point of abstracting is to find something new and worth highlighting in the original that was not able to be seen, I don't think it has to do with destroying but more so with looking through a new lens.
2. In your own work, how do you feel that the medium that you choose best expresses your meaning, message & own truth? The medium is chosen based on content not emotion for me.
3. In your opinion, why do you think that the Gerald Peters Gallery mainly selected Fair's photos for their abstract impact? (not showing the photographs of the smokestacks & factories). Do you believe that these particular abstract photos were selected because of an "over-all" sense of platonic beauty? Do you believe that the GP Gallery wanted to appeal to the "masses" in order to make a better sale? I think that the gallery is not as interested in vocal work and they focus more on work that can insure a not-interested-in-art viewer sale.
4. What are the similarities between art & documentation? Documentation can be used as a way of approaching what you are making, documentation can become art, but that happens on the conceptual not aesthetic side.
5. In my own work, do you feel that i convey a sense of environment & mood? The aerial view painting does this, the others convey that paint is pretty.
6. Do you feel that the process & materials that i use, best expresses my message in my paintings? If not, then please explain what materials would work best for the execution & final outcome of my work. I am still not sure what the message in your painting is. I am not sure that there is a message that comes across more than what painting materials are capable of.
7. How important is the use of scale in your own work? And do you believe that i use an appropriate size & scale for my paintings? I think that in your smaller pieces that you do some really interesting things with your materials that gets lost in the larger work. It seems as though there is a time allotment that you are working in and your larger work needs more time. They don't seem as finished.
8. What do you think of my color palette for my paintings? What colors do you think I should use in my next painting. I don't.
Response to Shellie's Article
http://books.google.com/books?
The like above will take you to the entire book. I am asking that you read chapter 6. That is page 89-100 its pretty short and entertaining. Hope you all enjoy. Here are the questions. let me know if you have any questions or have trouble with the link
Chapter 6 From the Book “Woody Allen and philosophy”
Woody on Aesthetic Appreciation p. 89-100
Questions:
1. After reading this article analyzing Woody’s work do you feel like his movies mock how contemporary art classes approach talking about art? Why? I think that he is mocking the way that people add content to work when it is not there, they are reading into work as though there everything needs interpretation and everything is a symbol.
2. Do you ever feel surrounded by people that you need to impress/fake being overly excited or emotional about your work? If you do ever fake these emotions, why? The excitement in my work is more vivid when I am talking about it with colleagues, but that is the extent of it. My excitement level has more to do with me than with the viewer.
3. Would you say you art leans more towards needing emotional or intellectual appreciation? Does this relate to the aesthetics? I would say more to the intellectual side, this directly relates to my process. I am not looking for an emotional reaction in the majority of my work.
4. Do you care about how your work looks while your creating it? Do you ever step back and move something around just because it looks bad? Does the work become less intellectual if this happens? Explain. The aesthetics play more into the final editing stages of my work, and are there to reinforce/highlight the functionality of the art object.
5. When you view my art do you have any intellectual response? If not does this mean my work has no aesthetic value based on what the chapter requires for a meaningful aesthetic response. I have an intellectual response but it is more to do with the subtle details that arise within the work.
6. Where is your fulcrum between intellect and emotion when creating your work on a scale of 1-10. 1 leaning more towards intellect and 10 being more towards emotion. Where is mine? I would say you are a 7 and I am a 3.
7. Why do you think I tend to reject intellectualizing art? I think that you have an emotional response initially and that is why you tend not to try and read something that is not present in the work.
8. I would consider my work to be relaxing to the viewer. Do you agree/why? I agree, your images come from a relaxing environment and this is carried over in your practice and development of your work. The delicate and rhythmic nature of working in the print studio is parallel with paddling.
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Jen's Reading
The Article can be found here:
What are your political concerns? Is there anything happening in the world beyond your self, that still effects you directly? Does this come into your work? I have personal political concerns, but would rather not publish them. However, they do indirectly influence my work.
What insights should artists provide? Do you agree that poets(artists) are "uniquely suited" to "speak publicly and morally about human aspirations"? I think they are uniquely suited but in the same way that a baker or construction worker is uniquely suited, artists just have another language to discuss them in.
What does it mean to be politically active?politically- Of, relating to, or dealing with the structure or affairs of government, politics, or the state. action- something done (usually as opposed to something said)
I do consider something said leading to something done to be politically active.
Are you able to relate to the work that I've made this year? What work? Do you relate it to any other artists or movements? I relate to your thought process in what you are making, especially with your new york times drawings and your chalk board piece, but although I see the poetry in the final piece I do not tend to relate to the final piece. I think you are interested in some of the same things that those indulged with automatic writing and see your work in similar ways that I see Christopher Wool's work.
What do you think would make my work better? I think that you would benefit from trying very ambitious projects and from self evaluation, especially in regards to what it is that you are ultimately concerned with.
7. Do you think some of my work can be political, even if I don't say it is, or take a specific position? Is this an effective way of discussing work? Yes, there are political threads in your work, it is something that as a viewer you can see without needing explanation from you the artist.
8. Does my work provide any insight? Technically, yes, especially in the way you arrange your work. But it is conceptually on the fence, I do not get strong convictions from your work, but don't know that I would want to.
Kris' article responces
Questions.
1. What is meant by a poor image?
The article says that this is a poor image > The poor image is a copy in motion. Its quality is bad, its resolution substandard. As it accelerates, it deteriorates. It is a ghost of an image, a preview, a thumbnail, an errant idea, an itinerant image distributed for free, squeezed through slow digital connections, compressed, reproduced, ripped, remixed, as well as copied and pasted into other channels of distribution.
The poor image is a rag or a rip; an AVI or a JPEG, a lumpen proletarian in the class society of appearances, ranked and valued according to its resolution. The poor image has been uploaded, downloaded, shared, reformatted, and reedited. It transforms quality into accessibility, exhibition value into cult value, films into clips, contemplation into distraction. The image is liberated from the vaults of cinemas and archives and thrust into digital uncertainty, at the expense of its own substance. The poor image tends towards abstraction: it is a visual idea in its very becoming.
The poor image is an illicit fifth-generation bastard of an original image. Its genealogy is dubious. Its filenames are deliberately misspelled. It often defies patrimony, national culture, or indeed copyright. It is passed on as a lure, a decoy, an index, or as a reminder of its former visual self. It mocks the promises of digital technology. Not only is it often degraded to the point of being just a hurried blur, one even doubts whether it could be called an image at all. Only digital technology could produce such a dilapidated image in the first place.
Poor images are the contemporary Wretched of the Screen, the debris of audiovisual production, the trash that washes up on the digital economies’ shores. They testify to the violent dislocation, transferrals, and displacement of images—their acceleration and circulation within the vicious cycles of audiovisual capitalism. Poor images are dragged around the globe as commodities or their effigies, as gifts or as bounty. They spread pleasure or death threats, conspiracy theories or bootlegs, resistance or stultification. Poor images show the rare, the obvious, and the unbelievable—that is, if we can still manage to decipher it.
I think that the poor image is one that is not considered within its context.
2. What is meant by the contemporary hierarchy of images?
That certain images hold a higher value than others. When an image is technically proficient that it is held in a higher value, and vice versa.
3. What qualifies a work as experimental?
I think that it is hard to define work as experimental until after it is followed by its successor.
4. Do you agree that poor images are poor because they are not assigned any vale from the clas society of images?
No, I think that an image is poor when every aspect of its installation is not been a result of a specific decision.
5. What relevance does this have to painting?
Especially because much of today's art is seen on a screen, at some point, everything made becomes an image. Paintings go from being about what has been discussed with paint to adjacent colored pixels.
6. How do we measure the quality of image?
Carefully.
7. Do you consider these qualities when constructing work?
I consider this when editing work.
8. What role does the human condition or the "everyday" have in your work?
It seeps in slowly and often times I don't give its due diligence until post-production.
Monday, February 21, 2011
Responses to Mcphereson's article of choice...
What stereotype do you identify with? I don't identify with or relate to a stereotype, and I don't think that stereotypes are what we talked about in the discussion. When I was told that I was wrong for saying that black people eating chicken wings and watermelon was not a stereotype of all people, I still maintain that argument. Black people in Belgium, or outside of the U.S. are not looked at with that same idea. I don't even believe that all black americans are looked at that way. I still think that it is a geographical stereotype, or at least that the location is just as important to the stereotype as the persons it is put upon, that is a stereotype of black people from the south in America.
Or
What stereotype do you most relate to?
During what activity do you feel most masculine? guess that I feel more masculine when I am working on my car or working out in the gym.
During what activity do you feel most feminine? Folding laundry and getting ready to go out.
May I take a video of you performing these actions? Sure
How do you feel about Adrian piper being on a suspicious travelers list? I think that it was an overreaction.
Would you makes the same decision that Adrian piper did if you were put on the list? No.
What do you think about adrians work that was mentioned in the article? I think that there is a lot of poetry in the way that Adrian Piper looks for the understandings of these roles. It is more explorative and about the nature of humans that it is what is being seen on the surface.
Response to Jeremy's Article and Movie:
Jeremy Fisher
The Nature of Existance (2010)
Synopsis: After exploring the phenomenon of TREKKIES, filmmaker Roger Nygard takes on The Nature of Existence. As he roams the globe to the source of each of the world's philosophies, religions, and belief systems, Nygard interviews spiritual leaders, scholars, scientists, artists, pizza chefs, and others who have influenced, inspired, or freaked out humanity.
Here's the link to a streaming copy of the movie:
to play movie: press the big red button (it will open up a pop up ad window), close the pop up, then press the big green button and enjoy!
And here is a supplemental text about Jean-Paul Sartre's analysis of human experience and death
Questions about the reading and movie:
Does the premise of condensing hundreds of religions and philosophies into one 2 hour-long documentary seem ill-serving to the history and magnitude of the subject matter? I don't think it is ill-serving, but it is definitely not all that is needed to understand the magnitude of the subject.
Do you consider your religious or non-religious beliefs before creating art? No
Sartre's understanding of life is that it reflects the experience of one's existence. How does your artwork reflect the experience of your existence? In everything that you do, art included, you are ultimately responding to the cumulation of experiences that you have had and your perceptions of what happened. The difference between an artist and the other is what we edit.
"The fact that we all suffer from the day we’re born to the day that we expire…is funny." What part should humor play in the discussion of religion and mortality? I think that humor is a way for people to deflect attention or uncomfortableness with what is in front of them, this includes the things we choose to have in front of us.
Questions about my work in relationship to the reading and movie:
Is it ultimately futile for me to investigate an experience I may never consciously take part of? No, consciously or unconsciously, the inevitability of death is something we will all face, trying to understand that process is sometime that gives meaning to life.
Is my pursuit of personal meaning through the creation of art absurd in relation to my perception of the meaninglessness of the universe? I don't think that the universe is meaningless.
If I was to die and "become my past" as explained by Sartre, how would my artwork play a role in that process? Would my work become the past as well? Is it possible for my artwork to stay part of the present after I die?
Am I qualified to explore death in my work? Does one have to be personally touched by death to be able to explore it in their work? As long as your work is viewed, it is part of the present, it is relevant to the present conversation. I think that being personally affected by death would give more of an understanding as to why you are exploring it in your work, but I don't think that adds to your qualifications, and if it did, then you really wouldn't be qualified until after you are dead.
Shane's article
Shane Murphy
here is the reading
and as a supplemental reading
I would personally like the conversation to revolve around the eHow article and it's broader context.
The questions I have are thus;
1) Do you agree that this is all conceptual art is? No, I think that this format for making art is ridiculous and that is supported by not only the author's credentials or lack there of.
2) How does the fact that there is a eHow on making conceptual art affect your ideas of art? It doesn't affect my ideas on making art, but it does reaffirm my ideas on the education levels of the general american public.
3) Is there a difference between this and the old Bob Ross painting shows? Bob Ross' show was about making a painting, generally landscape, in a stylized representational way, I wouldn't consider what he was doing conceptual art.
4) Can High Art survive in the modern world? It obviously already has. But that really comes up in the art market, where value is placed. Do you mean, high art surviving in a literal or ideal sense?
And for my own work.
1) My work is firmly entrenched in conceptual art norms, what forms of postmodern art has the internet made irrelevant, or are there any? The way that I understand post modern art is that it is relying on a universal and global audience, so postmodern art is reinforced by the internet not made irrelevant.
2) I feel my work attempts to make the intangible not just tangible but accessible, is there a point where accessibility tips to eHow? I don't agree that your work is making the intangible accessible or tangible. I don't think that you have done enough research to have a philosophical ideal or exploration of your self a fully accessible or universally understandable or supported process. At this point in your work, I think it is fully appropriate for you to compare the accessibility of your work to the way an eHow article functions due to the fact that neither are supported by scholarly exploration or understanding.
3) My concept of self dissection and betterment strives to be deep, dangerous, and relevant. Is there more to "good" conceptual art than the strength of the concept? Yes, a successful understanding of materials, craft, devotion and talent is need to make work successful. Good ideas are great but become nothing if you can not get the idea across due to a lacking of the afore mentioned.
4) Do you feel there is a difference between my work and something someone would make after reading this eHow? Yes
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)