http://www.ru.org/81gablik.html
http://www.bockleygallery.com/css/american_beuys.html
The readings “The Nature of Beauty in Contemporary Art” by Suzi Gablik and "I Like America & America Likes Me" by David Levi Strauss both have similar arguments about art. Both authors seem to focus on art being involved in society and to try and bring issues to the publics attention.
The first author, Suzi Gablik, focused on the argument that art should move out of the museums and galleries and more into public society. She describes art as something that is isolated from society, where artists work in seclusion away from society and the only contact with public society is in the gallery and museum. She instead advocates that artist must work and interact within public society on an everyday basis. After reading this I agree that art must move out of its own separate world. Just think how many people actual make it to art museum each year. I know personally that I don’t know many people that have made it into a museum to see art this year. So art in that context is almost foreign to people I know and I’m sure they aren’t alone. So a more active and involved art world might make an impact on the society in which it is supposed to be influencing and involved in. Suzi Gablik advocates that art should be involve in society but also bring things like pressing issues to the attention of the public. She describes one artist’s project of bring the environment to peoples attention. Everyday the artist would go to the Rio Grande River and clean trash out of the river and write in a diary describing what she did and felt. Suzi Gablik describes this as a perfect example of art bringing light to an important issue. Though I feel that art must be more active and take on issues such as the environment, this example is something I don’t really feel is art itself. Sure someone could describe it as a performance or literary art, I would argue that it is more an act of activism rather then art. If she instead took the garbage and constructed a large sculpture and displayed it in a public space where it would trigger a reaction, it would be art. But just the act itself I wouldn’t count as art but it is a step in the right direction for art to be more active and bring the attention of the public to issues.
The second reading approaches art in a similar way. The author David Levi Strauss describes the work of the controversial artist Joseph Beuys. Joseph Beuys originally wouldn’t come to the United States due to the war in Vietnam. But once he arrived his work tried to alert America about how it has lost touch with nature. His work was a display in which he did different things with a coyote. The coyote has a lot of symbolism such as in Native American culture. This is why it was a perfect vessel to use to portray the concern over nature’s role in America. This is once again an artist trying to grab the attention of society to an issue that they feel is important to society. This was the message that both authors tried to argue is important for art in the future.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Monday, September 21, 2009
A Second Look at Art
The following quote describes that the more you look at something like a painting the more you begin to see with in it.
“One of the principal ways we can change our relationship to difficult art is by repetition. An unpleasant piece of music may, the sixth or seventh time we listen, reveal new beauty. If we study one of Josef Albers's seemingly simple paintings of different colored squares, the colors start to shift. Of course, difficulty doesn't always give way to revelation - sometimes what follows is, alas, frustration. But when it does, we get that additional sense of satisfaction: The arduous ascent has been rewarded with a panoramic view.”
One painting I found this quote to be true is:
Title: Map of What Is Effortless
Artist: Francesco Clemente
Nationality: Italian
Year: 1978
Movement: Contemporary Art
When I first saw this picture it is very simplistic. As you can see the art has very clean lines and basic colors. It doesn’t seem that engaging at first look and wouldn’t be something that I would personally stop and examine in an art gallery. While it a fine painting it doesn’t have any real elements that would cause me to stop and look at its detail because simply by looking at it you can see what is depicted.
But the real part that I find intriguing about this painting is something you would have to stop for and that is its tittle. The title of this painting is the “Map of What Is Effortless”. The more I looked at the painting and its title the more I want to figure out the true message of the artist.
The first interpretation I thought of was the creation story found in the bible. The one which involves the seven days of creation where animals and plants seemed to come into existence through the will or the “hand” of God. This painting shows the effortless nature in which animals came into existence.
The second interpretation I thought of was human’s control of nature especially involving wild animals. All the animals painted are those that can be found in a zoo. So this painting shows how animals can be easily controlled. One can go as far to say that animal’s lives are in the hands of humans. That human’s can cause a species to go extinct.
Even while writing this I begin to think of different ways to look at the painting. Which supports the idea of the quote.
“One of the principal ways we can change our relationship to difficult art is by repetition. An unpleasant piece of music may, the sixth or seventh time we listen, reveal new beauty. If we study one of Josef Albers's seemingly simple paintings of different colored squares, the colors start to shift. Of course, difficulty doesn't always give way to revelation - sometimes what follows is, alas, frustration. But when it does, we get that additional sense of satisfaction: The arduous ascent has been rewarded with a panoramic view.”
One painting I found this quote to be true is:
Title: Map of What Is Effortless
Artist: Francesco Clemente
Nationality: Italian
Year: 1978
Movement: Contemporary Art
When I first saw this picture it is very simplistic. As you can see the art has very clean lines and basic colors. It doesn’t seem that engaging at first look and wouldn’t be something that I would personally stop and examine in an art gallery. While it a fine painting it doesn’t have any real elements that would cause me to stop and look at its detail because simply by looking at it you can see what is depicted.
But the real part that I find intriguing about this painting is something you would have to stop for and that is its tittle. The title of this painting is the “Map of What Is Effortless”. The more I looked at the painting and its title the more I want to figure out the true message of the artist.
The first interpretation I thought of was the creation story found in the bible. The one which involves the seven days of creation where animals and plants seemed to come into existence through the will or the “hand” of God. This painting shows the effortless nature in which animals came into existence.
The second interpretation I thought of was human’s control of nature especially involving wild animals. All the animals painted are those that can be found in a zoo. So this painting shows how animals can be easily controlled. One can go as far to say that animal’s lives are in the hands of humans. That human’s can cause a species to go extinct.
Even while writing this I begin to think of different ways to look at the painting. Which supports the idea of the quote.
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
What is Art: Article Reaction I
It seems that everyone has an opinion on art no matter how old they are or where they come from. Though there is a definition of art found in the dictionary it still can’t tell you if its art or not it but instead leaves it to personal interpretation.
While trying to define art two approaches that I have read are from these two links
http://www.artrenewal.org/articles/2005/abstract/ross1.asp
http://books.google.com/books?id=N5yfxzOr4j8C&pg=PA23&lpg=PA23&dq=Towards+a+New+Laoco%C3%B6n+by+Clement+Greenberg&source=bl&ots=8EApAHuN8w&sig=8jaEuHLXQe_Q52XkEQhHdAUtd-I&hl=en&ei=0YuqSp3MKsrTlAenhLXmBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=10#v=onepage&q=&f=false
One of the two articles takes the approach that only traditional paintings and status like “Liberty Leading the People” by Euegene Delacroix, which is described below, can be considered art. It explains that traditional art focused on people’s real observations and emotions that anyone that saw this art could relate to. I find that this approach is a good way to differentiate between what is and isn’t art. This idea of art encompasses what I personally feel is art because art should compel the ideas of the artists and this allows the viewer to feel and relate to the artwork. This can be true in the case of the “Liberty Leading the People” by Euegene Delacroix but not in the case of “The Physical Impossibility of Death in the Mind of Someone Living” by Damien Hirst.
This sculpture found above is a tiger shark that has been treated with preservatives and but in a tank. I feel that this piece can be called art because it illustrates the natural beauty found in the natural world, which is the theme that the artist wanted to portray. You could argue that natural beauty is something that everyone can relate to and is an emotion everyone feels but this piece still remains controversial.
The second of the two articles is “Towards a Newer Laocoon”, by Clement Greenberg. In this he describes the history and development of art over the past centuries. He describes that each movement developed off the one before it like stepping stones or building blocks. He describes that over time a new movement will gain momentum and look in at itself to try and describe art.
Each author would agree that the classical paintings like the ones found in the Sistine Chapel would be considered art. But Clement Greenberg would argue that even abstract art would become art because the artist look within the art itself to find the definition of what is art.
While trying to define art two approaches that I have read are from these two links
http://www.artrenewal.org/articles/2005/abstract/ross1.asp
http://books.google.com/books?id=N5yfxzOr4j8C&pg=PA23&lpg=PA23&dq=Towards+a+New+Laoco%C3%B6n+by+Clement+Greenberg&source=bl&ots=8EApAHuN8w&sig=8jaEuHLXQe_Q52XkEQhHdAUtd-I&hl=en&ei=0YuqSp3MKsrTlAenhLXmBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=10#v=onepage&q=&f=false
One of the two articles takes the approach that only traditional paintings and status like “Liberty Leading the People” by Euegene Delacroix, which is described below, can be considered art. It explains that traditional art focused on people’s real observations and emotions that anyone that saw this art could relate to. I find that this approach is a good way to differentiate between what is and isn’t art. This idea of art encompasses what I personally feel is art because art should compel the ideas of the artists and this allows the viewer to feel and relate to the artwork. This can be true in the case of the “Liberty Leading the People” by Euegene Delacroix but not in the case of “The Physical Impossibility of Death in the Mind of Someone Living” by Damien Hirst.
This sculpture found above is a tiger shark that has been treated with preservatives and but in a tank. I feel that this piece can be called art because it illustrates the natural beauty found in the natural world, which is the theme that the artist wanted to portray. You could argue that natural beauty is something that everyone can relate to and is an emotion everyone feels but this piece still remains controversial.
The second of the two articles is “Towards a Newer Laocoon”, by Clement Greenberg. In this he describes the history and development of art over the past centuries. He describes that each movement developed off the one before it like stepping stones or building blocks. He describes that over time a new movement will gain momentum and look in at itself to try and describe art.
Each author would agree that the classical paintings like the ones found in the Sistine Chapel would be considered art. But Clement Greenberg would argue that even abstract art would become art because the artist look within the art itself to find the definition of what is art.
What is Art : part II
Title: Liberty Leading the People
Artist: Euegene Delacroix
Nationality: French
Year: 1830
Movement: Romanticism
This is an example of what art is. It expresses the ideas of the artist whom created it. The inspiration message represented by the symbol of the woman carrying the flag and leading the people represents how this piece expresses the ideas of the artist through this median.
Artist: Euegene Delacroix
Nationality: French
Year: 1830
Movement: Romanticism
This is an example of what art is. It expresses the ideas of the artist whom created it. The inspiration message represented by the symbol of the woman carrying the flag and leading the people represents how this piece expresses the ideas of the artist through this median.
Mediums of the Mind
The title of this blog is the medium of the mind because Art, which is the theme, is the expression of people’s minds and ideas through different artistic medians. Mediums like paint, sculpture, pastels and the list goes on.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)