Responses to Mcphereson's article of choice...

http://www.artinamericamagazine.com/reviews/adrian-piper/

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:

http://www.megavideo.com/?v=10z589sk

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

http://www.ehow.com/how_4460350_make-conceptual-art.html

and as a supplemental reading

http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474976720616

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

Entropy and Egypt

http://www.robertsmithson.com/essays/entropy.htm and http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/02/egyptian-museum-on-fire-f_n_817532.html

Here’s a Smithson quote that I also feel gets to the heart of my concerns, it’s part of his seminal writing, The Monuments of Passaic:

"I am convinced that the future is lost somewhere in the dumps of the non-historical past; it is in yesterday's newspapers, in the jejune advertisements of science-fiction movies, in the false mirror of our rejected dreams. Time turns metaphors into things, and stacks them up in cold rooms, or places them in the celestial playgrounds of the suburbs."

And finally here are my questions:

Questions about the reading itself:

Smithson mentions that entropy essential is a trending toward balance, how do you feel this relates to a creative practice’s trending toward completion? When you hit a wall in your practice or in a piece, the work tends to fall apart in pieces and you can put it together again. It is natural to have it break apart in order to observe all of the pieces. 

Having been written in the early 1970’s this conversation mentions both energy crisis and the derelict remains of floundering housing projects, are these issues specific to the cultural climate, unavoidable and ubiquitous, or a combination of the two? It is a combination. 

Smithson mentions the an intention to sculpt the sides of the Niagara Falls to make it look less “man made” and more natural, how does this relate to idea of entropy? It is absurd, 

 Do you feel that you relate more positively to work that is more idyllic or dialectic, and why? More dialectic, but dialectic work can be idyllic. The fusing of two opposing matters can be in ideal outcome. 

Questions about my work in relationship to the reading: You can see my work on my website at www.nathanskiles.com or in the Keating Annex near the president’s office.

What does it mean to skip order and start from a state of incongruity? Well, it is really a matter of opinion and perspective, who is deciding that it is out of order or not of normal surroundings. Natural order?.. 

Why swim against the current? I thought that the perfect example of this, and the most ridiculous, was in the article where they are talking about shutting down Niagara falls because the natural  erosion of the rocks looked unnatural. 

What do you feel are the essential differences between being a conservative and being a conservationist?

Why do you feel that I chose to include the quote? You thought it was relevant I suppose. 

I decided to include several readings, how do you feel that relates to my studio practice, and why do you feel I do it? I don't think that these ideas come across in your studio practice. 

W is for Warfare

15 Feb 2011- Kim's article >> Chapter 1 of Mediated: How the Media Shapes your World and the Way you Live in It by Thomas de Zengotita

Questions about the reading itself:

1.  What does de Zengotita mean by "optional"? What I understand as mediated according to this article is ‘without direct experience’ and optional is no longer having the option to opt out. But really, everything is mediated to an extent. Rather you are reading a book or a magazine; the magazine is not any more mediated than the book. I think everything is real, just because it is not tactile, doesn’t make it any less real. The experience is still real, the emotions, the response, still real. Just because you are texting versus talking on the phone, one may be informal or less person, but not less real. Real is based on the content rather than context. I liked the quote that was brought up by Marilyn Manson, “ I don’t believe in loving everyone, because when you love everyone, love is irrelevant.” The option is not in the moment, the option has to be dealt with, the mediated is when the option becomes singular.

2.  It is easier to understand my identity in terms of what it is not rather than what it is. My identity is not conditional. It doesn’t matter what clothes I am wearing, or whom I am around, I am consistent. I don’t put much value into material possessions and I am honest to a fault. I am outgoing, or maybe it is that I am just loud, but I don’t let that many people in fully. I am not very forgiving, and have extremely high expectations of others and myself, mostly myself. I think those aspects of my personality make up my identity more than any physical or exterior trait.

3.  de Zengotita writes, "Some people refuse to accept the fact that reality is becoming indistinguishable from representation in a qualitatively new way." I disagree with this. I agree with what Nathan said in the discussion when he was talking about facebook friends. Just because facebook puts all of your friends into a box, doesn’t mean that you are unable to distinguish between people that you knew back in high school and someone you see and spend time with daily. The screen does not confuse us.

4.  de Zengotita writes," The problem with trying to comprehend the process of mediation is that you can't get outside it."  Can you imagine a way to get outside it?  If that was your assignment, to get outside of the mediated world/environment, what would you do? I don’t think that you can get outside of it, but at the same time you cannot get into it. Even if you were to move to a cabin in the woods, that is still a mediated experience, its just you are in more control of what is being edited. But at the same time, you can live in the heart of NY and still not be fully into it. It is not a mediated experience more so, it is a value judgment on what is the better experience. It is really more about how aware of your surroundings you are than what those surroundings are.

Questions about my work in relationship to the reading: You can see my work on my website at kimrusso.net

1.  I think my work has the "whatever" quality to it that de Zengotita describes.  Do you agree? I do not agree, I think that your work is very meticulous and very specific.

2.  I also think my work plays with the range between the real and fabricated/mediated that de Zengotita describes, and I present that range on a level playing field.  Do you agree, or not--and why? I think it is all mediated. But you are the mediator. But I also do not think that fabricated and mediated are the same thing. Mediated experiences are not that far removed from reality, it is all our perception of reality anyway.

3. What else can I/should I do to more successfully describe, in my work, the mediated/optional environment we live in in America? I am not so sure your work talks about this, or that it should.

4.  What is the similarity or difference between the "tone" of de Zengotita's writing/analysis and the "tone" of my drawings? Your drawings are not condescending self-righteous assholes. They seem to be reactions and fuses of fantastical and representational. The article was not.