Tony Cragg
Sinbad


Stack by Tony Cragg, 1975



global proportions
Haim Steinbach
2007
Sculptures



Yuriko Yanaguchi, Web #5 (detail), 2003
Abaca, wire and flax
8 x 7 x 21 feet


Joseph Beuys
Noiseless Blackboard Eraser, 1974
felt, ink on paper

Art and the Quotidian object

Is it art?

Is art anything different than any other thing life has to offer? Art is simply a perspective, a stance on the world that surrounds you. Is it's value of the object only there in the object because of the viewers acknowledgment of the objects qualities as art or anti-art?

Is this anti art aesthetic even more powerful today than it was in the 20's for example, the Un-monumental show?

Is this style of art elitist in any way? Does the un-institutionalized viewer appreciate its quality, its aesthetics its aura?

James Lee Byars, The Death of James Lee Byars, 1994




FRED TOMASELLI, Airborne Event, 2003


Fred Tomaselli
Glassy, 2006



Wolfgang Laib Ziggurat 1999
beeswax, wood



Artist: Michael Joo
Title: "Headless"
Created in year 2000

Art and Globalization/Spirituality

As long as culture changes and becomes more complex so will the belief system in which the society operates. With globalization and the speed at which the world operates it does not seem surprising to me that the art community is jumping and clamoring to keep up. Especially as there is often a lag between what is being made and the voices that give the creation meaning.
I personally find it difficult to separate spirituality and art. Both of these issues occupy a hostile place; they balance on the blades edge together. Artist makes what they believe and feel. The same is true with spirituality; they can both discuss what other realms fail to be able to communicate.
Art, literature, and music, come from the common struggle and desire to express the frustration of being human. This is a thought that I came up while reading the book.
Globalism has in fact started long before the watershed of 2002. If one looks at the Age of exploration a mere 500 years ago there were more than 12,000 languages spoken. Now, there are less than 5,000. The sheer loss of culture is a direct result of globalization. Think of all the artistic viewpoints that will never be appreciated, look at the cultural diversity that we will never celebrate. Is globalism such a good thing?
How can we allow for the benefits that come with Globalization like cultural appreciation, the burgeoning of ideas, and the value of new thought processes without eliminating less invasive, less dominating cultures?

presentation evaluation

This presentation went much more smoothly. I felt as though our group had much more chemistry and we divided up the conversation much more equally than the previous one. The activity I felt helped ease us into the discussion rather than the previous presentation when everyone tried to speak and bring up their own thoughts; scrambling our presentation. I felt much more like a discussion facilitator than last time. It says a lot for practice. This being the second presentation the learning curve helps out. We had much more guiding questions that the last presentation and I think that has to do with the fact this was our second presentation.

last two images where by Louise Bourgeois

The Woven Child 2002
Fabric, steel and aluminium


Fragile Goddess 2002
Fabric


Kerry James Marshall, RYTHM MASTR, 1999, site specific installation, 20 double-page, two-sided printed newspaper comics



Who's Afraid of Aunt Jemima?
1983
Acrylic on canvas, dyed, painted and pieced fabric
90 x 80"



Miriam Schapiro
Delaunay
1992
screenprint on custom paper
National Museum of Women in the Arts

Art and the Body/Art and Identity

Art and the Body/ Art and Identity
Is pornography an empowering art form that benefits the feminist cause/ artist community?
Does the phrase “sex sells” have some relevance to this form of work and if so how?
The article written by Henry Louis Gates Jr. “Does Race Exist?” was something I had to read while getting my undergraduate degree in anthropology. The excerpt from the text’ “Racial categories are arbitrarily applied to distinguish groups that have wildly different cultures, belief systems and economic interests” and later in the text another passage “with the assertion of identity comes the risk of being ghettoized fit together perfectly. After studying this paper and allowing it to really sink in over the last few years (through the aging process) I can see more clearly the meaning behind this work. By allowing ourselves to be categorized we lose pieces of our inner personal freedom. Our identities can be constructed and deconstruct by the labels in which we apply to ourselves, groups we associate with, and labels or categories being asserted upon us by other forces.
The term “Victim Art” was discussed in the Identity chapter. I understand the concept behind the term but my question is why? It seems to be a petty action in the renaming. The term “Victim” seems to imply that the artist is pulling at different strings, perhaps ones attached to pity were as the term “Identity Art” suggests a more explorative or introspective view on the world. Is the art of lesser quality? Is its message less clear? Is it less successful under the two different terms or should it not matter?
I should be better versed in my Historical knowledge so forgive me if this question sounds particularly silly. Was feminist movement the launching point for other Civil rights movements or was all of this social change occurring at the same time influencing each other? I suppose my ultimate question was what started the revolutionary thinking that spurred on the social paradigm shift?

Personal Evaluation

In the beginning the discussion got away from us. The group being full of talkative and intellectual people was tough to keep in check especially because of the controversial nature of our topic. Despite my efforts I often found myself standing idly by.
Another personal criticism would be that I found myself more focused on the issues and work I found particularly interesting rather than having a broad general knowledge of the subject. It is understandable that I the areas I found interest in would stick with me more so I cannot beat myself up to much.
The questions I was asking though I directed them to a certain degree and spent a great deal of time considering them they were beyond my intellectual power to understand and relate to the group. I don't know even if the discussion in classroom helped to shed light on these issues. It is all a very personal journey. I hope because there was no light shed on my mind that does not mean light was not shed on others.
I felt as though the presentation was informative and the group was very engaged which is a success for my group. I would have liked to have been more engaged with the discussion rather than facilitating it. I found myself thinking more about the issues others where being to the table than being a facilitator. The group was so self propelled I felt as though I could have sat back and let things run their own course. Though, when I did try to join the discussion it either interrupted the flow of the discussion or I found myself losing track of my thoughts... making me trip myself up, draw blanks on information, and over all speak poorly. Perhaps it was nervousness.
I also felt as though I was dominating the direction of the discussion as opposed to allowing my partner get involved. She was much more passive than I was and I am willing to be that was because of my loud and talkative nature. I need to be aware of that next time.
Over all I thought the discussion went well. There were a few areas that could have been improved but I will keep them in mind for this up coming Monday. If anyone wishes to comment on the presentation please feel free. I would like to hear what others thought.

What makes a good review

What makes a good review?
A good review holds true to both honesty and respect. Attacking the work negatively is not a necessity however an explanation of how the reviewer sees and approaches the piece is. This can be done with varying degrees of tact however the best are subtle and kindhearted but firm. The reviewer should discuss physical, functional, and visceral properties. The reviewer if well versed in the area should bring in Historical references or touch on the contextual elements of the work. The best reviews are those that are easy to read and contain visual descriptions in order to convey the work to those that are not able to view the work in person.
Personal opinion is a valuable additive however it must be clear that it is only a single opinion of the work. The best type of review is one that is unbiased. The review should raise both good points and bad in order for it to be effect. Most importantly the review must be helpful and clear to the reader. A review that does not shed any light onto the subject that is being reviewed is a wasted effort.

Art Narrative and Representation

Art Narrative and Representation

Time Noble and Sue Webster Real Life is Rubbish – 2002


Tim Noble and Sue Webster Dirty White Trash (With Gulls) – 1998



Heap
ARTIST: Jim Shaw
WORK DATE: 2005
CATEGORY: Sculptures
MATERIALS: Styrofoam, plastic spray paint, resin, metal rods
SIZE: h: 64 x w: 24 x d: 77 in / h: 162.6 x w: 61 x d: 195.6 cm


Mark Tansey (b. 1949, San Jose, California; lives and works in New York)
Triumph Over Mastery, 1986
Oil and pencil on canvas
59 7/8 x 144 1/4 in.


Lari Pittman (b. 1952, Los Angeles; lives and works in Los Angeles)
An American Place, 1986
Oil and acrylic on mahogany panels
80 x 164 in.

Artist from Art and Nature/Deformation discussions

Nils-Udo "The Nest", Earth, stones, birch trees, birch branches, grass, L�neburg Heath, Germany, 1978


Bob Johnson, Wheel Cube, 38 tire rims collected from the Pittsburgh Pool, Tireless Project, Summer 2003.


Keith Barrett "Whalsay", built on the remote island of Whalsay in Shetland, Scotland, this sculpture forms its own sheltered space in a hostile environment. Elm with concrete foundations and steel fixings, length 7 meters, 2001


Sphinx,2005,Edition of 3,Painted bronze34 5/8 x 25 9/16 x 19 11/16 in. (88 x 65 x 50 cm) Photo: Stephen White


優しくされているという証拠をなるべく長時間にわたって要求する

平成16年 / 紙本着色・軸 / 40×50
Demanding Proof of Being Treated Kindly for as Long as Possible

2004/Hanging Scroll--Color Pigment on Paper / 40×50

Art and Nature and Art and Deformation

Art and Nature
The chapter pointed out the fact that we as human beings have become more comfortable with the simulated world than the natural one. We have carved out these spaces within the natural world and hardly venture to the barrier that seems to hold back the darkness. When did the wilderness become such a dark and ominous place? At least at some point humanity existed within the natural world and it was a sacred place. What happened?
Is it hypocritical to expend massive amounts of resources in the creation of art to raise awareness for the natural environment? Perhaps the question is strange…
Where is this line between environmental activist and environmental artist that advocates for the environment? There are many activists who plant trees that do not consider themselves to be artist however, there are artist whose art is planting trees.
I thought the idea presented in the text referring to the natural environment needing to be sheltered from us was a profound statement. Historically speaking it was Humanity that needed to seek shelter from the natural world. We have somehow changed things to such a degree that we think it needs to be protected from us. I disagree. I believe that we must protect the natural world from our own actions because in removing ourselves from it conceptually we have put up this barrier… one I feel is imaginary. No matter how far removed we think we are, we are firmly rooted and tied to its fate.
Kac asked should we do things because we can? Or, are there limits to what we should explore, create, and perform? How about Cloning? Is that art? This large debate about how much is science and how much is art seems tricky. If all the artist needs to do is declare it art than it is? Or isn’t it?

Art and Deformation
This chapter I found less visually appealing. Perhaps that was the point of the chapter and the conceptual element of the work shown in the text however it did not hold my interest.
If a piece makes us turn away with disgust, embarrassment, or for any other reason has it done its job or not? If we do turn away abruptly and do not truly explore the piece in its entirety the message will be lost, in which case, only those that are coming to it without preconceived notions, expectations, and the fortitude can with stand it and receive its message. Generally speaking those that can do that is the institutional art community. Does this make this an elitist form of art if the message is lost on a majority of viewers?
Is this art form more difficult to place in a gallery?
I understand that deformative art represents this disruption of the typical flow to our world and the fact that the use of taboo imagery like bodily fluids, sex, decay, ect is conceptually loaded. But, these are the things of interest to the mentally deranged, the sociopathic, and the unstable. I am not suggesting that only the deranged think of these things merely questioning what our society has come to in which this is the solution that artist have come up with to disrupt the flow of culture.
I find it fascinating that we seem to be obsessed with this deformative form of art. To a lesser degree tv shows exploit the freak, movies are made about the sociopathic, the deranged, and the “Sick”. Where do you suppose this fascination comes from?

Art and Narratives

Art and Narratives
It is not a stretch to say that Narratives make their way into art. I really liked the quote, “story telling is a powerful engine for human expression”. Story telling is so deeply rooted into our culture from millennium ago until today with the use of film, novels, and other art forms. It is a great means of communication one that is one of the oldest ways of record keeping. I was surprised at the briefness of this chapter.
I don’t think the chapter fully explored the means of storytelling in a diverse enough manner; it mainly being photographs and video projections with a few exceptions. I would have been nice to see more sculpture. Weavings, found objects, and many other traditional methods of storytelling were left out. Perhaps it is part of the times. Using the technology of the day and age is important in presenting an idea however I feel strongly that we shouldn’t lose touch with these previous and or more “primitive” means of narration.
I was taken by Barney’s 5 part movie series “Cremaster” I would like to see it, perhaps not in its 12 hour entirety but I like the idea of this alternate universe, one that uses music, mythology, and social issues without the use of dialog.
What is the next step in the story telling process? Where do we (as a class) seem to think the next technology to take over story telling?
Stories being a complicated mass symbols/containing symbols using metaphors and complex themes and plots, is it possible to say all art in some fashion tells at least on some level falls into the narrative category of art?

Art and Represenation

Art and Representation

The camera can be made to lie… I agree with Hockney. I have always felt that photography along with other art forms is subjective. In photography you see a fraction of a seconds worth of information, no more. There is going to be a great deal of the story that is left out. We as the viewers will never fully realize the events that occurred prior or post photograph. Being handed a relatively small amount of information we can my insightful observations but the photograph can and often is misleading.
"For a work of art you need the hand, the eye and the heart. Many people would video that moment, but again, the video would turn it into a performance. Fellini says everything in front of the camera's a performance."
This passage references a lot of what we have been discussing. How far can the artist be removed from the working process before it is no longer his work of art? I am relatively unfamiliar with video/performance based work. This being said I would argue that tenderness can be conveyed and the fact that it may or may not be stage is irrelevant to the emotions being conveyed. If it is fact or fiction is not the argument but whether or not the moment holds emotion. I would say that video, film, and paintings all can and have captured emotion.
I have never read Plato’s Republic however; I was shocked to read that Artist would be removed for their representation of lies. What is a culture a society without art? Artistic social critics are essential for cultural growth especially in a system like a Republic where peoples’ voices are heard.
I was taken by Gerhard Richter work. His work appeared highly spiritual. It was described as dreamlike and that seems to me to be a very accurate assessment. I felt as though he might have been referencing some of the work Yves Kline was doing as well.
Photography freed Art by allowing it to focus on ideology rather than representation. Is this true? Throughout the majority of Art History, art has been focused on interpreting the world around us. The meaning behind much of the art done prior to written record is, of course, up for interpretation, however it clearly does seem to represent the natural world and the influence it has on us as human beings. I am sure there have always been those that use art as a means representation but there have been those that used it to convey higher meaning pushing it in a more ideological direction. I do suspect photography helped push art into a more conceptual oriented route though not the only cause. As time progresses societies have a tendency to become more and more complex and this too would affect the art world.

Whoa...ifesto on You tube

Good Ol, stuff

This to me is art and Architecture. Something old to inspire something new.

http://www.arthistoryarchive.com/arthistory/architecture/Bizarre-Architecture.html
Something a little Bizzare

http://www.robertbruno.com/
Steel House!

http://www.bartprince.com/default.html
More cool stuff

http://egardens.blogspot.com/2009/08/tree-houses.html
tree Houses (massively cool)

The art and architecture section of Art and Today reminded me a great deal of spatial archeology. Spatial Archaeology is a relatively new method of studying the remains of settlements in order to reconstruct and map human interactions with each other and their settlements. Using these methods of archeological surveying archeologists are able to determine unique social nuances within a community. For example, how the structures are placed around a central cooking fire as opposed the spacing of homes being built when individual family groups cook together. The sharing of resources and food promote an egalitarian society as opposed to a society based around a hierarchy, something that most likely would be unable to be determined otherwise. I only bring this up because in the text, it suggests that architecture is a social commentary. The values of a society bleed into the environment in which we create. What is it that our environment is echoing? With Architecture like Façade, Storefront for Art and Architecture, A-Z Management and Maintenance Unit Model 003, and Ciudad Transportable, what are we leaving behind and what will it be interpreted as?

What can I say about the Radicant that we haven’t already touched on? I don’t know… Having finished reading the book, re-reading some because I felt as though I had misinterpreted its meaning, and digesting it over the last few weeks I feel as though I have made some haste conclusions myself. I would have to say that this book was a success; a success because it frustrated me fully. As a creative mind it is important to be moved, shaken from your tree, and maybe kicked around a bit so as to see the world from the ground, not a tower, or the front porch. Perhaps that is what B. is getting at. There will be a counter movement, the oppressed, the frustrated, the angry, and the critic will all blaze a new trail; which direction I have yet to figure understand. The important part is that we all keep working. So in that regard… I hate to say it but good job NB you’re frustrating.

I was really taken by Rachel Whiteread’s work. The space casting not only seems incredibly challenging but taking the negative space and turning into a three dimensional monumental sculpture really lets my mind wander through the possibilities. I don’t know if I get a sense of vulnerability as the text suggests but I do like to think about these unnoticed spaces within our everyday. The examples that really called to me were: the spaces between library books, and the space under a bed.

In From Bauhaus to our House I found the example of the paper creation to be just fantastic. Currently I am working with paper myself. I am exploring its “soul” if you will. I have enjoyed its complexity as a material. Although, I disagree with Albers in regards to his choice of material. Who is to say a castle or car or toy cannot be made of paper? Yes, the folded page exploits its “purity” as a material. However, as a creative mind and as we (our class) have pointed out we make do with what we have. If a castle must be made and paper is all you have, then it must be made of paper... or a construct in the purely conceptual.

1

This question came to mind as I was reading. Where is the boundary between sculpture or a sculptural installation and architecture if any? I am not sure I can give a concrete answer that isn’t filled with my own personal opinion. Both sculpture and architecture use similar principles, practices, methodologies, and deal with similar obstacles to overcome such as: gravity, material cost, structural integrity, scale, and local. On that basis alone I would lump them into the same genre of creation. However some buildings I would not consider to be architecture, simply a structure. Perhaps it is in the “Aura” (if I can borrow the term from W. Benjamin) of the creation that defines it as sculpture or architecture.

http://www.vdb.org/smackn.acgi$artistdetail?ACCONCIV
Vito Acconci video page

http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/living/2009/06/23/glass.us.jeff.koons.itn.html
Jeff Koons

http://blog.art21.org/2008/12/11/mark-dion-methodology/
Mark Dion (Methodology behind his work)

http://popup.lala.com/popup/360569449467838170
My Bloody Valentine Loveless

http://www.artnet.com/artist/2179/bernd-and-hilla-becher.html
Bernd and Hilla Becher

Its all over and up to us!

As for the book as a whole… all I can really say is whoa. There are a great deal of ideas, opinions, haste conclusions, things I agree with and things I do not. As a creative mind I see its value. Though, as he said in the beginning this is only a sketch of the contemporary issues at hand. I suppose the main thing I have gotten from the reading of this book is that these times are not only socially and economically difficult but also difficult to define as a critic of art. The questions raise revolve around what is valuable. If everything is accessible from home where is its value? As the next generation of artist how will we choose to shape the world around us? Do we engage it? Do we retreat? Do we throw in the towel and grab a beer? I suppose it is for me to decide. It is for you to decide

Lost in translation

Bourriaud brings to light translation in his book a lot. We have discussed it in class and I am still not fully onboard. For not only the social sciences but art as well; we must understand the cultural nuances in order to not separate ourselves from the meaning for another cultures message. However, if you go around translating everything does it lose some of its meaning? Take for example the English word Okay. We all understand this word and many other nations whose language is not English, also have adopted this word because it is so expressive. Another example is Doch, a German word that cannot be translated into a single word. Sometimes we simply do not have the vocabulary to understand the full meaning.

Journey to the center of the adventure

Bourriaud asks a question in regards to the journey. How does one explore when the world has already been discovered? In response to this I must say that exploring is something we all fascinated with. Why do college kids take road trips? Why do some go backpacking around the world? Why are some fascinated with the seas or space? It is because there are doers and there are dreamers. The answer lies in not the exploration but in the adventure. Experiencing something new is a personal journey that allows the individuals spirit to grow. I find this to be a wonderful section of the book. I can relate to this section more than most of the other sections of the book.

Oh puppet master

What do you, who follow my ramblings, think of the idea of a master narrative? I hate to admit it but I think Bourriaud is correct. There is no room for a single stream anymore. There are far too many things occurring all at the same time for there to be a single story teller. I am skeptical that there ever was. There is very little way of telling what the rest of the world was thinking about prior to just recently unless it was written down somewhere. Not so strangely history books are now being written so that they include the rest of the world as oppose to just a western European perspective. Even still these books are hard to come by and marginalized greatly. Just for an example, there is very little history of the Native American written down from a non Eurocentric point of view. The massacre at little big horn, The Boston Massacre… To the “other” they were victories, triumphs, successful engagements. The Eurocentric perspective is now having contention and it is now finally coming out in the art world.

What am I to do?

What is an artist to discuss? I have been saying that art is uniquely personal to both artist and viewer. But now see that isn’t a good enough answer anymore. It doesn’t provide a sound response to anything nor give direction to the art world itself. The small paragraph regarding Hirst, Koons, and Cattelan raised these particular question. Has the artist become a cynic, a critic, on commentator? The philosopher Bourriaud suggests on page 91? If nothing is off limits and no one can say “HEY! Don’t go there!” and no clear defined rules as to what art is or can be where are we? Where does the value of the artist lay? Or is there any value at all? Has the art world finally hit a point of overload?

Some images of Artists discussed

http://www.cmprocess.com/works/other_works
Tsuyoshi Ozawa installation

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9SE06lHXsBo
Nam June Paik

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hP03QNPvs80&feature=fvw
Nam Jun Paik :Venus

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8965426400791308088&ei=646BS5imJ4T6lQet5qCkBQ&q=anri+sala&hl=en#
Anri Sala: Purchase not by Moonlight

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXtyu4qIsZk
Anri Sala: Spurious Emission

Postproduction me?

How does postproduction affect me?
Up until the moment of this class the ideas of postproduction spent very little time wandering the halls of my mind. Although there was always some inkling of the greater meaning it wasn’t until I actually tried to digest and process these arguments to produce some of my own thoughts. I am still working on understanding the higher meanings. As a creative person not necessarily an artist, I have to consider the issues of copyrights, and “Intellectual property” that comes into play in my own work. Up until now I have always created my own pieces; however, currently I am attempting to use more ready-mades exploring a more conceptual process of creativity. It has been a difficult transition and still ongoing but it plays falls largely in this realm of grey-ness that is the arguments that surround post-production. There is a great deal more processing and reading that needs to be done on my part to see a clearer image of where I fall in this alien realm. I am positive that this class will aid me in this intellectual journey I am undertaking.

John Mackenrow is awesome

The devitalization of history transformed into merchandise and style. Is this how capitalism has absorbed the anti-system?
I feel as though art has always been the voice that yells at society through a long and dark hallway. I think that if art were personified it would similar to John Mackenrow, talented but exceptionally angry and defiant. Just as John Mackenrow was a talented tennis player he marketed as the bad boy of the sport with a heated temper. I think this is very similar to how capitalism treats the creative. Capitalism has taken a high energy subject with what I would consider to be intellectuals and transformed them into mainstream or hot item like merchandise or style.

To a screaming halt

On page 47 the quotation “Aesthetic postmodernism is distinguished by the creation of an imaginary universe of flotation and fluidity that reflects this vast process of deterritorialization by means of which capitalism accomplishes its goal.” I feel as though Bourriaud lost me here. What imaginary universe is he referring to? I re-read this part several times and still was unsure of how he came to this conclusion. Can we discuss this?

Yum Apple Pie

Is art moving away from the symbol in order to confront the real as Bourriaud suggests?
I don’t know if I have the breadth of knowledge to begin to answer my own question, but, I am skeptical at this notion. All images are symbols. Simply from my understanding of language, we as humans must think symbolically. We associate “things” (in the broadest of terms) with meaning. For instance, apple pie, apple, thanksgiving, the harvest, holiday, family, feasting, plenty, ritual, and so on and this may or may not be different for all people. To say that art has or is moving away from symbol or meaning seems to me a horribly generalized statement. I disagree respectfully I suppose. What about you all?

Oh Faith how crazy you are

I was really taken by Alain Badiou quotation “To what are we faithful? To what historical fact are we binding our action?
It is enjoyed taking a moment of reprieve from the dense reading to contemplate this quotation in context to the rest of the reading. My thought process started by looking at the word faith and I began to process. What a loaded word to use. I thought of religion then to our cultural value system, (which I figured was more appropriate) where art fell on this list. I feel as though art falls just short of making the list for the majority of people. I am not entertaining the idea that is not valued; it just merely falls behind kids, food, the mortgage, car payments, school loans, ect. It is a luxury after all, especially in this chaotic time of economic hardship for many. So it seems we are faithful or we value the comforts of peace of mind. We have faith that our material and slavishness will give us some sort of peace or happiness. Perhaps this is why art is so complicated to understand, the value system, it seems to me, is askew.

Stand close stand far

Is it possible to view and appreciate a piece of art without understanding its cultural context?
For a fair portion of the reading Bourriaud discusses this notion of the “other”. I am not sure if I can say clearly one way or another on the matter. I feel as though it is possible to appreciate an object without understanding where it comes from. However, as Bourriaud suggests meaning can be lost in translation “The irreducible remainder”. After doing some thinking about this particular statement, I am not sure how much of anything is fully understood. We all have our own interpretations based on historical, environmental, and social influences. Most things are highly contextual. I feel as though this idea is highly westernized and highly imperialistic. As we discussed in class, the artist is rarely present to delve into the meaning behind his artwork. The viewer is the one that places meaning on the piece in relation to her or himself.

Where to find some super cool images of Rirkrit Tiravanija's work.

www.foodcrypt.com/2009/06/rirkrit-tiravanija/

http://www.artnet.com/artwork/425999301/425932097/rirkrit-tiravanija-cooking-corner.html

http://blogs.walkerart.org/visualarts/2006/08/04/open-ended-interview-doryun-chong/

http://www.artnet.com/artwork/425968837/424237546/untitled-2008-the-future-will-be-chromeping-pong-table.html

http://www.artnet.com/Artists/LotDetailPage.aspx?lot_id=EA75CCB7EC8CA8A4

http://www.artnet.com/Artists/LotDetailPage.aspx?lot_id=96CBA15F7E34018C0930BA7F70BDA106

A "where did you come from question?"

I am unsure of the origins of this particular question; however it came to me after digesting the reading. So I figured that I should share it with those that are following along. With the ever burgeoning technology to explore in context with visual arts is it possible that in the near future physical galleries will start to disappear and digital galleries where all are welcome, provided they pay a small fee via credit card? If these galleries already exist or do exist in the future how will impact the way we view art? If the view is not in actual contact with the art how will art change?

Thanks Bob... these times are a changin

I was surprised at my reaction during particular parts of the reading. One in particular in the beginning of the reading was when he suggested there has been a shift from the ideology of “What can we make that is new?” to the “How can we make do with what we have?” I feel as though there has never been a shift from one to the other. Both have always been in play throughout history. Art, which in my opinion is a combination of forces that impact the artist and the direct results of the time and place that they originated from. The political struggles of the age come out in the work, the atrocities of war appear as well, and because we are in a time when new doors are being opened by technology, do not mean that there has been a shift. It simply means that there is only more information, more impacts, more influences to be internalized. In times of chaos and confusion, things break apart. I see this as one of those times.

The Pondering Wanderer

I could really relate to the work of Tiravanija. I found the “Universally exotic Nomad” exceptional. In my experience while traveling, searching for intangibles, allowing myself to give in to the moment wholly, his conceptual process is very similar to my own. I often feel as though I might be one of these “exotic nomads” that is brought to light in the reading. I also feel that art is an essential part of everyday life and should be encouraged.

Ha, DO IT... yourself?

What do you suppose will happen if the “Do it yourself” paradigm seeps into every layer of cultural production?”

Will Capitalism destroy it or absorb the paradigm to forge a stronger system? If this “Do it yourself” attitude does become a dominant ideology could it be the death of the artist? How does it change the value (both monetary and cultural) of art?

I don’t know if it is possible for this particular attitude to penetrate into every layer of cultural production. There will always be those that prefer the handmade or homemade, however, the majority will prefer the convenience of products supplied for them. If it were possible for this attitude to become the dominate paradigm I believe that it would have the potential to seriously challenge the current social system in which we live. Those that can provide for themselves have no need for the institutions that provide the purpose for the masses. I feel as though art will always hold some value, both cultural and monetarily in all systems. It is our intrinsic nature to be creative and express our own personalities through our actions and façade.

Whoa Copyright

“Are we heading towards a culture that will do away with copyright in favor of free access to work?”

I don’t believe this will be the case. As long as there is any monetary value to be had in products, copyright will always play a part in the process. The issue of copyright is ever evolving especially in the world of art. As more and more art is produced in the digital realm the grey area will continually grow. How many pixels must be changed from its original to meet criteria for a new work? How much can be borrowed? Where do these issues end when dealing with the conceptual?

Grad Art Benjamin assignment

What is the aura of a work of art?

The aura of a work of art is found in its authenticity, timeliness, socio-political stance, historical references, artistic medium, cultural context, personal artistic nuances, and all things that make it a genuinely personal creation. A piece of art is not unlike us; it also carries emotional ties, has its own body language, and can and will be affected by its surroundings deeply and personally. The aura of a work of art can also be found in the interaction between the viewer and itself for the brief moment in time that is shared in some transcendental psychological dialog.

In Benjamin's mind what effects did mechanical reproduction, such as film and the camera photography, have on the viewer’s perception of art?

Mechanical reproduction has not damaged the intrinsic value of art nor has it degraded its cultural significance merely changed specific aspects of the art world and how these changes directly correlate to everyday life. Mechanical reproduction has made artwork more accessible to the commoner and has lessened the sense of the “purity of art” that was predominating in Modernism. With photography and film the artist can keep up with cultural trends, speech, idioms, and their interactions with other cultures. These new technologies enable art to retain more of its authenticity.

What is meant by the passage: “for the first time in world history, mechanical
reproduction emancipates the work of art from its parasitical dependence on ritual.”

Art’s shift from art of ceremonial objects to those that encompassing the artist’s views and from “private reverence” to “public common place” shows a swing away from the ritualization of art. The reproductive nature of work being done in this day and age has in part destroyed the ideas of the “original”. In some cases there is no “original” (like photographic prints) which is a direct contribution from the age of mechanical reproduction. The arguments that encircle the values of authenticity cease to exist and new issues come into the lime light regarding artistic value, cultural content, and socio-political economics.

What mechanically or otherwise reproductive processes are changing the face of art today?

The vast cornucopia of technological innovations has changed the face of the world. With Globalization the world has become figuratively smaller and the use of technology has opened up new avenues for communication. This communication enables artists to be influenced by an ever burgeoning artistic community. New CAD programs allow for complex model making, new digital technology allows for films and other videos to be taken and edited faster than ever. Projectors, lazers, Micro and Macro lenses, and computers have and will continue to add their influences to new and personal art movements and styles.

A New Age of Art

Art of 2010…
In this ever shrinking world, in the age of communication and easily accessible knowledge that lays at our fingertips it is hard to think that the art of 2010 is not going to become vastly technical but I hope for it. The art of 2010 lies in the hands of the ones taking this class and classes like it all over the world. I can only speak for myself and say that this constant bombarding of technology, of blogging, of tweeting, and facebooking, has urged me as an artist to visit something simpler perhaps a return to something more primal or revisit the past in a new way, discover what it means to be human now and in this age... If I had to give this new and or approaching age of art a name I would call it Neo-Nature Technological overload: A discovery of humanity… again. Maybe that is a bit lengthy for a new age title. I can’t see that on the title of a book anywhere anytime soon… I will work on something better but until then that is what I am going to stick with. I think it started in the late 90’s just as the Y2K scare threatened us with total technological apocalypse. Technology is suppose to make life simpler but instead as one new convenience comes along that simplifies one aspect of life, we fill that empty time slot with another task and then another and pretty soon we are so deeply buried under a mountain of obligation we don’t have time to just breath.
I think this movement is going to have many of the same principles as the Junk Artists and Land Artists of the 1970’s. Also, I think the green movement and the environmentalist movements that have become so popular with artists like: Andy Goldsworthy, Nils-Udo, and Chris Jordan are going to play a large role in the direction of this new artistic paradigm. Who knows, maybe individuals that are non-artists with anthropological background will have their ideas echoed through sculpture and prints. You can already hear some of these echoes in photography as anthropology pulls more and more art forms into its arena of influence in order to spread the word about humanities fascinating nuances. Only time can tell the direction of shifting paradigms. As far as I am concerned the tides are turning.

The Post-Modern Artist

The Post-Modern Art Movement was an attempt to create an alternative thought process in order to provide an avenue for the artist who wished to present their beliefs and values that contradicted those found in the Modern Art Movement. It is argued that the Post Modern Art Movement began in the 1950’s and continues to this day. The principles that are associated with the Post-Modern Art Movement are “Destroying the notion of the Avant-garde”, and questioning the value of the art being made today. Post-Modern artists sometimes pull from previous movements such as realism, pop art, Dadaism, and Surrealism. Artists like; Chris Burden, James Rosenquiest, and Rene Magritte are a few of the well known Post-modern artists of our time.

The Modern Artist

The Modern Art Movement is the collective power of all past artistic and cultural influences that impact the Art of the time. The “Modern Art Movement” began when humanity started to think, produce, and believe autonomous thoughts, reducing the power that institutional religion had; allowing for experiments that pulled at humanities curiosities. Modernism is argued to have ended shortly after Second World War. The principles of Modern art include producing art for the sake of art itself, being avant-garde, and original in both color and form. Doing things that have never been done and saying things that have never been said; a few well known modern artists include: Salvador Dali, Pablo Picasso, Jackson Pollock, Andy Warhol, and Mark Rothko.

The Persistence of Memory (Salvador Dali 1931. Oil on canvas, 9 1/2 x 13" (24.1 x 33 cm)


Picasso Untitled (monumental sculpture) Chicago IL


Jackson Pollock, Blue Poles: Number II, 1952,
enamel and aluminum paint with glass on canvas, 82 7/8" x 15' 11 5/8"


Andy Warhol, Campbell's Soup Cans 1962


Mark Rothko Red, Orange, Tan, and Purple, 1949
Oil on canvas 84 1/2 x 68 1/2 inches (214.5 x 174 cm)

Post Words... to Post

Post-Modernism, Post-Minimalism, Post-Impressionism, Post-Modern Classicism,Post Apocalyptic, Post-structuralism, post-fordism, post-colonialism, Poststreptococcal, Postherpetic neuralgia,Post-viral, Poster, Posted, Postern, Postillion, Postcard, Postdate, Postdoctoral, Postgraduate, Posthaste, Postmaster, Post-nasal drip, Postpone, Postscript, Postpartum depression, Postwar, Posting, Postman, Postal, A post (the fence variety) A post (the blog variety),Post this silly list of Post words.