PostSecret
This is a community art project blog that I came across. People create postcards telling secrets about themselves and send them in anonymously and then they are posted. Some of them are quite amusing and others are well done. Do take a look, you may learn something about people in general.
I also attended the Carol Anne Carter lecture last week. I would just like to say it was very interesting since I never have heard of a fiber artist, and I had no idea what to expect. Though Carter seemed to cut the lecture short in respect to the following performce after her lecture, I would have liked to see more. What appealed to me most about her art was the experiences she gained from them. With every piece there was a story, someone intereting to meet. Someone from a third would country, or a new contenent. Her response to cutlures, and even in sense her own personal cultural history are captured in these fabulous crafts. Textures and material from the land or grasses, huts and houses, clothing, mud or hats are woven, tied and collaged together to create pieces that reflect that experiance. To me it is much more than a painting, the actual and pjysical experiance creates the art. I konw someone stated earlier that since Carter started first as a painter until she found herself in fiber art, could be seen as waste of time. But I think that just adds to her experiance as an artist and to her fiber work, and may never have found her place today without it. Her journey is her art and her past artistic experiance adds to every piece. My favorite was the fiberwork that was left out, and at night mice came and chewed on it. The next day Catter found very intersting teeth holes in the work that also added to the whole experience.
I thought i would post this about Rodin and Balzac due to the brevity of the lecture.
The reason Balzac was one of the greatest sculptures of all time was because of the way Rodin made it, he made 7 full scale models of Balzac all looking for that essence that was talked about in class. Rodin made them all nude and lined them up in his studio to sit while he remained in frustrative thought. He let them sit there like that for numerous months. This is another reason his patrons were irate, because to them no progress was being made. All those years for Rodin and what to show for it. Then Rodin hung the plaster soaked robes on each and every Balzac, he studied them for more amounts of time and finally reworked the plaster on the final Balzac and he thus derived the greatest Balzac. When he put it before his patrons, they and even the whole of France where crazed with anger. In their minds it was a monstrosity, and owl a snowman, all of this true but only later was it to be seen that this was why it was so good. Critics said there could never be such a body that could exist under the robe, and said it was anatomically incorrect. Rodin knew, however, that all he had to do was to strike the Balzac with a hammer and the cloak would fall away revealing his original nude. Rodin of course did not do this, but instead withdrew from the commission. After he set it up in his garden Rodin said that it was his greatest work, a pivoting point for him in his sculpting. Rodin indeed never sculpted in the same way, but in a new and even more expressive style.
Fauvism, my favorite movement, because of my love for bright colors and abstractions, and appreciation for Vincent van Gogh's work. Color ruled in this modern period, and artists at the time painted works that expressed themselves. For example, van Gogh stated "Instead of trying to render what I see before me, I use color in a completely arbitrary way to express myself powerfully." The Fauvists at the time carried this idea that van Gogh had had and they started translating their feelings into color with abstractions. Even though it was a short movement, I think that it has had a lasting effect, at least for me. I will always have a great appreciation for this movement.
Modern in America
Collection Insight
Jul 8, 2004–Jan 2, 2006
SAM Fourth Floor Galleries
Modern in America, an installation drawn from SAM's permanent collection, looks at how photography and painting have interacted in American art from the 1920s to the present day.
Beginning with works by originators of American modern art—Georgia O’Keeffe, Marsden Hartley and Paul Strand, among others—the installation shows how different early modern artists looked at the same world with brush or photograph in the 1920s and 1930s.
In the 1940s and 1950s artists such as Jackson Pollock, Mark Rothko and William de Kooning used the distinct properties of oil paint to define a style of painting that withdrew entirely from the premises of photographic representation. Their handmade paintings, lusciously dripped, scumbled, poured and spilled, were the antithesis of anything the machine could do. When Jasper Johns and Robert Rauschenberg, and Andy Warhol introduced the real world into their paintings it was by incorporating everyday objects and silkscreened objects.
For artists active today, photography is no longer used solely to make an image that is true, and painting and photography are interchangeable mediums.
----------------(Above from Seattle Art Museum Page)----------------
I don't know if anyone would be interested in making a trek up to Seattle to see this, but seems like a really nice exhibition. I was thinking maybe the 3rd weekend of May head up for a day trip. I've only been to SAM once, but I had a really good time.
I went last year to see the Spain in the Age of Exploration exhibit and it was amazing! They had an audio guide in english and spanish- I chose spanish first and it was really interesting! My boyfriend is currently in Spain and I've had him sending me pictures of all the art and architecture, it's absolutely gorgeous! :)
So after viewing the new installation in West Gallery, I thought it wouldbe a perfect time to discuss the changing role of the artist and art as acommodity. The art in the last half centaury has shown a marked differenceto the art up until that time in the way that it was marketed. Especiallyseen in the impressionist art we have recently been looking at now, heavyemphasis was placed on a painting's ability to sell, both to sustain theartist and reaffirm their skill. If you debate the artist’s need for affirmation,just look at Monet's the contingency that the government buy a painting thathad been rejected over a decade ago when he donated his “Waterlilies” works.
With the emergence of photography, the idea of reproduction and“the original” began to change. Though multiples had existed before in sculpture,never before had artists been able to cheaply and quickly produce so manyreproductions of a work. With the ideas of originality being challenged,things began to change radically. As with Sherrie Levine's "After WalkerEvans," some works purposefully had no original. Levine re-photographed thefamous series by Walker Evans with no alterations or artistic elaborationsbesides the change in the title. Work before and after this has pushed theidea of art as a non commercial object. Land art in the 60's started a movementof art that was seen sometimes only in photos and could not be purchased.Smithson’s Spiral Jetty was one such piece that, though has physical permanence,is so remote that it really only exists in the photos that portray it.
Performance art also shows this temporal reality of non-commercialart. An interesting example of performance work would be Gillian Wearing's"Dancing in Peckham." This piece consisted of Wearing dancing in the middleof a mall, despite the lack of music. Like many other new works, this pieceis normally represented by one known photo. Other performance pieces oftenexist in sketches, maps or simply in the physical aftermath of the work.
The show in West Gallery is an interesting continuation of the artfor art's sake idea. The art obviously exists only within itself and theemphasis is placed on the experience of the viewer instead of the work itself.So what would you say? Does photo documentation count as art if this is theonly way it exists? Artist demand crazy prices for this documentation sometimes.Is the shift away from art as a commodity important to the art movement?Does it make art more honest? More pretentious? Does it matter? What do youthink?
I was doing some research on some earth works and I heard about the artwork of Walter De Maria. Walter installed hundreds of stainless steel poles into the ground in a field in New Mexico. The poles attract the lighting which allow for an extroadinary show for people to see. There are accomodations for people to stay overnight and see the lighting. Can you imagine what it would be like to be in a little building surrounded by metal poles being struck by lighting? This work interested me and I hope that more of you will find interest also. If you have ever been to The Lighting Field, I would love to hear what it was like and your impression of the work. Check out the above link to find out more information.
I just found out Eduardo Paolozzi, of the Independant Group, died last week at the age of 81. I don't have time to write much, so I will just say this: Paolozzi was super-cool.
Arpa ektim
Screenprint, 1974
Recently, I made a trip to Washington D.C. While there, I was able to see an exhibition of Mark Rothko's works entitled The Mural Projects at The National Gallery of Art. What I found intersting about these pieces is that they are simply colored rectangles on slightly different valued backgrounds, yet they, like the book states, do evoke a certain emotional state. For instance, as soon as I gazed upon one of the works, I could sense almost a sense of anger. The piece was done in bold shades of red, and the center rectangle seemed to jump out of the background. It was a very passionate piece. I found it very cool that a person can get just as much aesthetic appreciation of an emotional status by looking at different colored blocks, as they can while looking at a representational piece of an actual emotion.
I just received this notice via email today and thought I would pass it on for your responses. -John M
I would like to talk about something that I think about very much and would love some feedback on. Maybe I am just old fashioned, I am quite a bit older than the average student, but I am driven a bit crazy with the digital era.
As a photographer and musician for many years, I have a strong preference toward traditional "analog" technology. My philosophy on fine art is to steer clear of the computer to create my art, unless it is the vehicle to get my work seen or heard.
I love to send digital photo e mails to family and friends-how cool! But when it comes to the art itself I just love the idea and process of rendering light onto film and being able to physically hold the result in my hands. This may sound sacrilegious to many but Photoshop is not the way to become a master image maker! Only an opinion. It is a great way to achieve results to create an image for a utilitarian purpose, and is an amazing tool. But to know how to control light in the exact way you want it to look on film is much more a fine art than using a powerful computer program to achieve the "same" result. It is the difference between truly controlling and painting with light and understanding the process, and uh, not.
In order to discuss what I will be talking about in my post next week, I figured it would be better to give people a background on the concept underlying the topic I will be writing on for my post next week. Last term in Graphic Design Processes one of the topics we covered was that “official” and “unofficial” language/art. The examples that follow have been taken from both discussions in class and from reading out of our class text: Visible Signs by David Crow. It’s hard to sum up everything Crow discusses over his two chapters (one each for official and unofficial language), but his main example centers tends to hover around graffiti. Crow defines official language as language that has been accepted by a certain linguistic community – that is any group of people that agree that one thing stands for another. This official language is often “enforced” by institutional conditions which impose the official language on the surrounding linguistic community. Unofficial language is language (this can also be applied to art) that appears outside of the regular linguistic communities, often forming smaller linguistic communities in opposition to the larger official language. Perhaps the biggest draw of an unofficial language is that it has no control placed on it from the outside. An interesting point that Crow brings up is that unofficial language will usually appear in the strongest concentrations in a an area of heavily imposed official language – for example, according to the book, the highest proportion of graffiti attacks take place in schools, the institutions responsible for maintenance of the official language, and on local authority (state) property. Crow points out that a couple artists (such as Keith Herring) have managed to achieve commercial success by moving the world of “graffiti” (unofficial art) into the gallery (considered to be an area of “official art”).
That is more or less my best attempt at summing up Crows views on official and unofficial art. If you found any of that interesting, I urge you to pick up a copy of Visible Signs by David Crow (ask a graphic designer: chances are they have a copy, and would be more than willing to let you borrow it, or even part with it themselves after going through Processes last term) and read through chapters 5 and 6. This concludes my “prologue” of my post for next week where I will be discussing what I believe to be one of the most ignored and overlooked forms of art in today’s world. Feel free to post comments and replies as this concept as it was an interesting catalyst to conversations we had in class last term. What does everyone think about the concepts of official and unofficial language and art? Are there any types of art you think are overlooked because they are not official? Or are there any types of art that you think have been pushed into the relm of official art by a majority of agreement that it is indeed art?
This concludes my “prologue” of my post for next week where I will be discussing what I believe to be one of the most ignored and overlooked forms of art in today’s world.
I was wondering if anyone knew of a "First Friday" type event in the Corvallis area. I know they have first Thursday in Portland, but do they have one in Corvallis? Back in Grants Pass they do an art walk, with musicians and such on the first Friday of each month, and it is a great thing to do in the spring and summer. I was just wondering if anyone knew of one around here, so if you do let me know!
This show put on by the Oregon Potter's Association at the Oregon Convention Center in Portland this past weekend, was quite good. My dad had some gallery pieces but there were a lot of booths also. Items ranged from your usual tacky garden sculptures, some awesome raku, lots of gorgeous whellthrown pieces, and some really funny political mugs that had George Bush turning into an ape as you turn the mug around. I helped wrap up at the checkout and those mugs were quite popular.
I just attended the Guerrilla Girls On Tour performance last night. They are a group of 26 female active members that are art activists. They fight for womens rights in the art world and theatre world by using humar and propaganda in hope to achieve equality among sexes. The Guerrilla Girls perfomance was very active and lively involving the audience in skits also making the laugh throughout. I had no idea what to expect but I was impressed. I origonally learned about this group in art history last year, and wasn't aware that they are still an active group. There were only two members at the performance last night but they were fun and active performing skits and reading letters from other university students. They touched on subjects on how to get involved and make a difference, women in polictics, current events, and some of their activist functions like stickering and the Tony awards. I did not releise that they are now divided into three sub groups because there are so many issues, they found this is the best approach. There is the internet broadband division, theatre, and the art division. The acts they provide on tour is one about rape adn domestic violence and the one performed last night called "Feminists are Funny Too". This is definately a strong groupd of women who believe they are making a difference and have seen more women's plays being produced since they started in the 80's. They also give credit to a group they call the "Baboon Boys", because they need their help for instances like posting the men's bathrooms. The women in the Guerrilla Girl's group keep their identity a secret and take on names of dead feminists will under their gorilla masks. They also celebrate strong women in history and incurage women and men a like to take a stand. If given another oportunity to the Guerrilla Girls on tour, it is definately worth seeing.
Today I walked into the Fairbanks in the morning and I bumped into the time when students from Art 352 were doing Performance on the second floor. They were presenting a concept by moving a pile of sand five feet to the left in a rhythmic movement with tablespoons to form a new pile. By doing the same routine repeatedly over 2 hour period, they prompted student to question their own daily routines. It is always fun watch performing art in public, especially when it keeps you thinking. I think they have chosen a very good topic on this performing art and showing it well.
I walked by around 11 o'clock during the passing period. And I found it very interesting. At first, I thought they were being weird playing with sand in the building emotionlessly outside the classroom because nobody was stopping to look at them, everyone were trying to rush to their next class or rushing to some other places. Then, I walked closely and read the paragraph of the introduction about the Performance and photo of the motion that they're performing on the wall. I stood around, stared at it and thought about it for a few minutes. Sometime, we just got to stop there for a few minutes; you might found a lot of interesting/ thoughtful pieces around you in the Fairbanks that changes our thought about life.
(I even took a video clip on them by using my cell phone, haha)
There are some other interesting displays in Fairbanks' different floors. I think students should spend more time to stand around and enjoy it sometimes!
---------------------------
Helen, great! I was glad to see this being discussed. I hope you don't mind if I add some more information here. Below is the statement from the artists explaining their concept and a photograph (click to enlarge). -John M
I went to Carol Ann Carter's lecture after she spoke in my class and what surprised me was how she evolved as an artist. As an undergraduate, her work was figurative and fairly traditional, but this was left behind for more abstract works in which she sought out the particular style and medium to which she now belongs. But this change as an undergraduate is particularly interesting. For, as i have always understood it, most artists begin in a representational form and it is funny that in the modern art school, many artist shy away from their original intentions. Simply they stop working in representational forms. Now the reason or reasons for this is unclear in my mind. For I think it strange that a fiber artist would originally call herself a painter. It would seem to me that an artists medium, which usually begins with a pencil would drive its subjects toward a particular style. Very seldom for instance do you see a fiber artist who works representationaly and an artist that prefers pencils and charcoal usually works representationaly. Yet students are drawn into their art carrier apparently uncertain what medium works best for their artwork. Or further still, why would an artist bother to learn how to draw figuratively if they discontinue such work? Carol Ann grew up with fiber art around her, she too eventually made such art, but her direction was not always pointed thus. Her lack of knowing what she wanted out of her art, drove her to many places and to many people, yet it would have been easier for her had she known from the beginning what she wanted out of her art. Thus I would say, I would wish it that I knew what I want out of art, so I could avoid such troubles and get down to making what I want and will always want. Floundering in the purist of a direction wastes too much time.
I noticed that yesterday someone posted the question "is music art?" I just thought I'd give my two cents on the issue, as the relationship between music and the art world is something that I spend way too much time thinking about. Recently the Los Angeles County Museum of Art put out From John Cage to David Byrne: Four Decades of Contemporary Music. I was excited to see such a collection, one that placed David Bowie, John Cage and Momus in the same light of artistic genius. This album also reminded me of a conversation I had with some fellow students a few weeks ago, when we thought up a mythical music/art department course which would examine the history and art of pop music.
Of course I would agree that music is an art form (although it isn't always necessarily used artistically). While music itself may not be visual, music can be designed to create a visualization of something in your mind's eye. I've always seen music as a kind of conceptual art, a media that bypasses the eyes and appeals directly to thoughts and emotions. Consider how we give textural adjectives to music, like the smooth sound of an Al Green record or the rough quality of a Tom Waits song. Certain kinds of music bring to mind certain feelings or even remind us of landscapes (example: Another Green World by Brian Eno). The ideas that go into music are what make it art, the recognition of music as what it really is: arranged sound. Also consider how visuals can be applied to music to create a new aesthetic experience, such as the spectacle of a Pink Floyd concert or a thought-provoking Radiohead video.
My favorite musician/artist/writer Momus (who's song about Jeff Koons is included on the aforementioned contemporary music compilation) frequently writes about the relationship between music and art on his livejournal. In fact, today he has posted some thoughts on the "space-producing" abilities of music. Check it out, if you find this stuff interesting.
Hey everyone. I'm originally from Ashland and just in case anyone will be in the Southern Oregon area I thought I might post this. Each Year the anual Wine, Food and Art Festival "A Taste of Ashland," is sponsored by the Ashland Gallary Association. It is a walking tour of Ashland and is a big event every year. Galleries throughout downtown and the Railroad district will have special exhibitions of the work of local and nationally known artists for a showcase event! There will also be art demonstrations and performances across the city taking place. Tourists and locals tour from gallery to gallery, hitting many vunues as well as sampling downtonwns finest wineries, bakeries, restaraunts etc. Nearly 30 galleries are involved and 19 businesses also host the works of different artists. This year the event takes place April 23 and 24 (Sat and Sun) from noon to 4pm. There is a cost involved for ticket purchases, but there is also a free preview Gala on the 22 from 6-9pm at the Ashland Springs Hotel located downtown. Anyone who would like to read about more information you can check out this website, where you can also purchase tickets: http://www.ashlandspringshotel.com/taste_of_ashland.php
Ashland is a great town for Art and has recieved national recognition as being selected as one of the top 10 art towns!
Check out what some local kids did. I guess we can still hold some faith in our school system.
A topic I would like to discuss is music and art. Are they considered the same? I will give my opinion, I'm open to replies and critiques. Through past art classes I have taken, the idea of music and art being considered the same form of human expression, only different forms, has been discussed. I've heard those that say, "Music and art are indistinguishable, a piece of Bach or Mozart can be considered the same expression as a piece by Monet." On the other hand, some say, "Music is different than art because involves instruments and music notation, while art is an expression through medium in which there are no boundaries and no instruments needed for creation." What is your opinion? Mine is pretty straightforward. Certainly, music and art both provoke senses and emotions out of the viewer or listener. But that is where I think music and art differ. The person observing the work has to either listen or hear. Music is not something that can be viewed but has to travel to your ears. Art has to be viewed, although, can also be accompanied by music. But the key there is that music is accompanying the work and is not the work itself. As well, creating both forms involves two very different methods and approaches and is therefore utterly different.
Hey everyone! I just had a quick question that I'd like to ask you. I would like you all to help me out with my Art 499 class which is the making of an art catalogue for the senior show, we have not yet found a name for our catalogue and would like you to suggest some names to help us out. Please and Thank you!
The art catalogue is a catalogue showcasing the senior show. It will have some student written articles and pictures, a page about each artist in the show also a picture of there work.
Your friendly blogger,
Nigel
Wanna see art and underwear?
April 18-22 at the West Gallery in FAIRBANKS HALL.
The reception is Tuesday the 19th from 5:00-7:00
there is a performance at 6:30
There will be free snacks.
I wanted to thank everyone that came out to the University of Oregon Museum of Art today. I really had a good time. I always enjoy viewing great art and being able to discuss it with my students is a definite bonus. It was nice being able to discuss actual artworks rather than just the digitally projected images we have in class. Although, the highlight might have been getting to know a little more about your lives outside of the university over the food and beverages afterward!
Okay, for those that missed out on this outing, there are others coming up soon. This Thursday, April 21, Carol Ann Carter at 7:00 PM at LaSells Stewart Center. Immediately following at 8:00 the Guerrilla Girls On Tour will also be speaking on the OSU campus. You won't want to miss this one. For more details check the Events! listing in the sidebar.
I have a friend that goes to Cornish in Washington who's having an exhibition at the Alley Cats Gallery in Sea Side. His stuff is pretty experimental, deranged and should be a pretty interesting show. so if there is anyone that's interested in going to see this, the opening is at 6:00pm on Saturday the 23 of April. There is a bar there and i can't remember if he told me its going to be an open bar or not, but if you wanted to see the show and meet the artist and some of his crazy friends, come to the opening. the address is the Alley Cats Gallery, 111 Broadway, suite 11 97138. the show goes through the 31 of this month so if you are in the area you should stop by. i am sure it will be crazy. i will be posting an update as soon as i go and hopefully some pictures so the poeple that wanted to go that couldn't can still get a taste. -Erica
I have always been told that art is something that one person(or more) may create to convey emotion, history, etc. But when someone's work of art is condensed, folded, manipulated, or altered in any way, does the meaning of the work change? This question came to mind during class the other day when John mentioned the top four posters in college dorm rooms. Van Gogh's 'Starry Night', Monet's 'Waterlilies', Munch's 'The Scream', and Salvador Dali's 'The Persistence of Memory.' I realized how easily we, as a culture, can turn something that may have originally been private, into something that is mass produced and 'typical'. My question to you all is this: Once a work of art becomes typical, does the meaning of the work change? And if so, is it for the better or for the worse?
A Piece of New York Culture.... This is an interesting article/slideshow about a grafitti artist, a legend at that, who has somewhat turned to legit sculpture that still carries on the look and feel of his illegal paintings. He seems like quite the character when asked if he had all illegal pieces still he said "I might still have a few little knickknacks scattered around in places where they're not supposed to be, who knows?" he said. "I'm not commenting on that."
Link to article.
Art is one of the last areas of knowledge that is based on passion and emotion. Of course their are techniques that should be mastered. An artist must prove he/she can create the accepted, traditional art, before respectably pushing art's endless boundaries. There are no successful nonchalant artists. If art becomes political, it is because the issue is one that touches and inspires the artist. It seems that artists throughout history have always had a secret agenda with their art from Da Vinci to Jaune "Quick to See" Smith. Even when art was meant to be merely aesthetic or documentative. Art is a form of expression and a reflection of the artist's priorities.
After our discussion in class about the role of photography as an art form I came to see many parallels between the reasoning for photography as an art and also how many of the arguments made could also establish video media as an art in itself. Through its evolution video art faced many of the same criticisms as photography did yet as it progressed has become more and more accepted as an art form. Video presents a relatively new and an almost unlimited number of avenues in which an artist may flex his creative muscle. It is an exciting prospect as personal video cameras have dropped in price enough that everybody may be able to own one soon. I believe the video art we have seen up until now is just a small taste of what is to come and what we are capable of.
-Blake Heiss
Diffferent people in different places learn art differently. We experience Art through daily life since childhood. Art is often symbolic. In different cultures, we have different meanings toward things, such as colors. Some cultures see red as blood and violent, and some cultures see red as joy and celebration. I come from Hong Kong a few years ago. Sometimes, I feel gaps, misunderstanding and culture differences toward Art apart from people here. How do we except Art from all the different point of view?
Although today the word "Art" usually refers to the visual arts, the concept of what art is has continuously changed over centuries. How do we think and define "Art"? Drawings, etchings, paintings, suclptures, and portraits, etc? Is comupter programming still define as art? We usually use Science and Math to explain to a computer. When we are working on an illustrated copy, (covers, graphs, maps, photos, and brochures, etc.) what type of program do we consider as Art? How do we define Art in these days? Do we define an computer programmer who work with graphic an Artist? How do we define an Graphic Desinger and an computer programmer?
I heard about this artist in one of my classes this year. His name is Vik Muniz and I found his work to be very interesting. He uses unusual mediums such as sugar, chocolate and thread to create unique pieces of art. He is well known for his sugar baby pieces where he makes portraits out of sugar and than photographs them. I've included a link for everyone to check it out. It's pretty cool and well worth the time to view his artwork.
Last summer I was lucky enough to spend quite a bit of time in Barcelona, Spain. I had an amazing time and absolutely loved it. One of my favorite attractions that I had visited was the Sagrada Familia done by architect Antoni Gaudi. It was not orginially designed by Gaudi, but he took over this job and changed the designs drastically. It was nothing like I had ever seen before. There is an incredible amount of detail for the eye to take in. It is almost overwhelming. A new modernist style, it is based on forms from nature which I clearly was able to detect especially by viewing the interior. As it sits today it still remains unfinished, but it is still being constructed long after Gaudi's death. It is said that construction will continue at least until 2041. Gaudi left behind few models and designs because he was constantly improvising and changing the design as it was constructed. When this masterpiece is finished it will be able to accomodate up to 13,000 people and stand tall with 18 towers. I do recomend to anyone traveling to Barcelona to visit. I hope that I will have the chance to return and hopefully see it in its completed state.
I went to a seminar a couple of weeks ago. The seminar was put on by a company called SERA which specializes in workplace design utilizing sustainable products. I was very interested in this because I am a 2nd year interior designer here at OSU and this subject appealed to me becuase the industry is currently looking for many ways to design buildings with enviornmentally friendly products. They put on a very good presentation which also included some very scary statistical information such as how many people are going to populate this earth in just a short amount of time. This is going to add pressure to designers to come up with some alternative ways to approach housing for that population growth as well as using products and production processes that will be less harmful to our depleating resources. They were also noting that we as the human race may have had things right thousands of years ago when we lived in mud houses and used our resources to our advandage such as orienting our housing to take full advantage of free light. Of course we are no longer interested in living in mud housing,,,,but ya never know. For more information if you are interested please contact Johne@serapdx.com or 503-445-7372.
Determining what is art has to be one of the most controversial things. What some see as junk others view as beautiful. Most of us all agree on some aspects of beauty but other tangents are much more vague. To some people they believe that art is considered a painting or sculpture. In this case they would believe that Michelangelo work on the Sistine Chapel or Antonio Canova's sculpture of Venus is their idea of art. As we have seen through out the different periods in history different art forms have involved making things more abstract and modern. It is essential that new art forms are creativity in order to keep people from being bored of things of the past. But through these new advances in art form that the question comes up...Is this really considered art? Garbage taken and reconstructed into a scultpure and new mediums used. I guess it truly comes down to art and beauty is still in the eye of the beholder.
My tool is the camera, my canvas is the film. The only thing that holds me back is my vision.
I became an art major, only due to the fact that there is no longer a journalism program at Oregon State University. My goal is to become a newspaper photographer. I have spent the past three years working as a freelance photographer and have had a few newspaper internships as well. While my photography is not “arty,” ( most of the time ) I play it straight. It captures the reality of everyday life as I see it.
A recent school project on things that are blue. http://www.collinandrew.net
Pleased to meet you! And I look forward to our future posts.
For as long as I can remember, I have loved art. It has brought me tremendous escape throughout my life. However, I never quite understood the Pop Art movement. I am more of a "Classic" Girl myself and I found Pop Art to be very meaningless and extremely uninteresting.
My grandfather however has a passion for modern art and he is a lifetime member and donor to the San Francisco Musseum of Modern Art. As you can see, our contrasting veiws on this topic have often lead to late night debates whenever were together. Therefore, a couple of months ago he made me go with him to the opening of a Lichtenstein exhibit and my opinion on Pop Art completely changed. I realized that even Pop Art can contain great depth and personality without being fake, and I think I was extremely lucky to have participated in veiwing this work. I loved how he used just a few words or phrazes to express the dynamics of the peice. I find that it is sometimes harder to find one word to describe an emotion or action, rather than using a thousand. ( I think this is what shows his geneius )
Therefore, I was wondering if anyone else has had an experience like mine, about how you could completely feel one way all your life, and a certain painting, sculpture, photo, collage etc. has completely changed your mind and made you reevaluate yourself and your convictions concerning art?
If you would like to know more about the San Francisco Museum, or if you are in the area, here is their address http://www.sfmoma.org/
Curiosity has hit me. Greenberg wrote about art for arts sake aka the paint is the painting. How would/do Greenbergians view video art. Would it be the quality of the video, or if it was contaminated with subject matter? The actual quality of the film it was recorded on? The film itself? The Camera?
I am taking art 199 Video Art intro. Is the video art the video or the act that is happening. It has many of the same intricacies as photography does and more. . .sound.
In most of my classes we have been learning about distinct architectural and interior style periods such as: Gothic, Neo-Classicism, Rococo, Victorian, Arts and Crafts, Art Nouveau, etc. Homeowners today inhabit a wide range of revival styles - equipped with modern conveniences of course! There's not really one distinct style that reflects today's predominant architecture and interiors. Great flexibility is given towards individual taste and preference. Can anyone detect a current style? There's always noticeable trends in technological advancements. How do you think future buildings and interiors will be influenced by the way we are living in now?
i read "In Plato's Cave" by Susan Sontag and while there were good points that she makes about the reality and context of photographs I was generally turned off by her overall negativity.
It seems as if she would be the last person in the world to use a camera the way she condemns the majority of the Western World for the manner in which they take photographs.
Here are a couple things I did not enjoy about this article:
-"photographs will offer indisputable evidence that the trip (vacation) was made, that the program was carried out, that the fun was had." Personally I take photos to remember things...not to offer my friends indisputable evidence that i was there..."a way of certifying experience"
-"using the camera appeases the anxiety which the work-driven fell about not working when they are on vacation and supposed to be having fun" What? Does she really believe what she is saying? I cannot understand how people would have this subconscience desire to take photographs because it's the closest thing to their job that they can while they are on vacation.
-"to photograph people is to violate them, by seeing them as they never see themselves, by having knowledge of them they can never have." hmmm... makes since, but i don't feel violated.
-"needing to have reality confirmed and experience enhanced by photographs is an aesthic consumerism to shich everyone is now addicted"...i understand what she is saying but what does she suggest? Does she suggest that noone ever look at another photo.
Just read the last paragraph of the essay and I think you will see that Susan Sontag believes that photography is the worst thing that ever happened to the world. Correct me if i'm wrong, seriously...but there is this completely negative vibe to her article and she's a little overbearing.
I was fortunate enough to visit the East Coast this past February and see a Frank Gehry exhibit held in Washington D.C. Though I favor Frank Lloyd Wright's style, with his simplicity of rectilinear shapes, which somehow he fits majestically into natural surroundings, I must say that I was very impressed and intrigued at Gehry's work. I've known about his architecture for a long time, this was just the first time I've ever been able to see his models and idea up close and personal. Even though I'm not a big fan of organic shapes, and curvilinear lines, Gehry has great fluidity in his architecture, and obviously it works for him. With this in mind, I was interested in hearing about some of your favorite architects and/or structures and what intrigues you about them.
I had the opportunity to be critiqued by, and listen to the views of a visiting artist last week... I often felt that they were not sharing their political opinions as opinion, but as fact... I am someone that understands and embraces the presence of politics in art... However I feel it is unnecessary to belittle others if they do not share in your political/other beliefs. My question is; when an artists political agenda over powers the art itself, is this a positive or negative?
I'm working on a project for another class, and my focusing on this artist named Casey Reas. I think his work is really great because he uses computers.. binary code... he uses ones and zeros to make this wonderful moving art, and also still. But I want to try and get a conversation up on this type of work and what everyone thinks about this new style. By using a computer do you think that it really is art? And well what does it mean to you? His work has been seen around the world. He has a website that you should all check out, watch the videos and the stills. He really brings the science and the arts into one unit that we can all interact with and understand.
Chris Richard
I recently attended Harrell Fletchers lecture last term as part of OSU's visiting artists series. Fletcher is an artist who's approach is to first understand a site's physical and social characteristics. His work invovles diverse non-art related populations and individuals, and reaches audiences around the world. For the last ten years Fletcher has worked collaboratively and individually, exploring social spaces and communities.
Though arriving 45 minutes late to his lecture at OSU, I found some of his collaborative works quite compelling. In particular, his on-going website; www.learningtoloveyoumore.com, which I invite you all to visit. At this site not only can you view the collaborative efforts of people around the U.S. and world on a particular assignment, anyone can participate and submit their pieces to add new ideas and diversity to the site. Some are funny, some are pure sound, and some are just strange submissions that show how different the world and people really are. It is worth taking a look, and feel free to let me know what you think!
Recently in Art 199 - 4D Design we watched a movie called Dog Star Man and I am curious what other people (particularly people who have seen it) think of this movie. For those of you who haven’t seen it, Dog Star Man is a nearly eighty minute long movie by a man named Stan Brakhage. The film itself – just imagine taking out your eyeballs, dipping them in a jar of incredibly thick strawberry jam, filling your ears with the aforementioned jam, and then watching a movie of a man climbing up a mountain in the snow. For the most part we get eighty minutes of abstract, undulating shapes and colors with randomly (or so it would seem) placed clips of a man climbing a mountain. Brakhage himself has stated that this is “the story of an ordinary man, a provider for wife and children”.
One of Brakhage’s main visual theories that he likes to explore in his films is the concept of “hypnagogic” vision. Close your eyes for a second, and then reopen them. Ok, you just saw hypnagogic vision: all those weird colors and shapes you see when you close your eyes. Brakhage tries to emulate this vision using different layers of film superimposed onto one another as well as drawing and painting on the film itself.
Personally I think it [hypnagogic vision] is an extremely interesting idea to toy around with. However, eighty minutes worth of hypnagogic vision, slight slivers of reality, and no sound whatsoever is a bit much. Unless I’m missing some grand realization here, I find it somewhat ridiculous that Brakhage is heralded as a complete and utter genius for this work. So what does everyone else think about Dog Star Man?
this art gallery, Yoshida's, seems like it would be a great place to go and look at fine art while in a fun and enjoyable setting. there is music playing and wine tasting and good food. the atmosphere of the gallery would add to the experience while looking at the artwork. this month there is a show by john pierce, a black and white photographer. i'm always looking for not only good galleries to look at art, but fun ones. this one seems like it would be really fun so i thought i'd share my find. the gallery is located at 206 NW 10th, Portland
I was lucky enough to be in Ann Hamilton's afternoon critique. I was nervous because of seeing how phenomonal her work is and knowing how well known she is. However, she was really kind and helpful and full of ideas to help improve students' work. I also really enjoyed her talk tonight. I thought she had the right tempo and showed a wide cross-section of what her work has become and how it was. I have really enjoyed this artist lecture series this year. We are so lucky to have this opportunity and I was happy to see that the hall was so full, and that people were willing to sit on the floor just to hear Ann speak. Visually, I thought that the installation piece with the braille on the walls and the red powder flowing down was one of her strongest. I also really loved hearing about her obsession with hands and the mouth. I loved some of the smaller, more personal pieces, like her photos taken with her mouth, and the deconstruction of words. I thought her piece with each line getting burned out was definitely strong. Also, next Thursday there will be two talks- one by Carol Ann Carter, and a performance by the Gorilla Girls. I hope everyone will show up to support these ladies. (P.S. does anyone know how to check the spelling on this? My icon doesn't work)
Recently (i.e. particularly this term), I've come into contact more and more with the pervasive view of the modern artist and art viewer that art is entirely subjective. That there is no definition to art and that we cannot define it because it is different for everyone. I would argue that beauty is in the eye of the beholder but that art is not. Since originally art meant skill (from Latin) I think it is interesting to see often times in today's art world skill is not necessary to create art (anyone remember someone signing a urinal?). Beauty can be in all corners of creation and simply requires a mindset to appreciate it, but in order for something to transcend to the realm of art it should require the careful and laborious process of utilizing carefully cultivated skill. The best example I can think of would be Picasso, in that early in his career he clearly had the technical skill to mimic life as it appears and that later he implements that in order to distort and create a different message. Often times it seems to me contemporary artists cheapen art by using the excuse of breaking with the past to excuse their lack of skill in execution. If I am to consider myself an artist and gain credit for working hard to become so, I really would rather not share the title with someone who has spent no time culitivating their skill. I am very curious to see if anyone feels the same or to hear a rebuttal from all those who fervently disagree with me (I know theres a lot of you!). Perhaps by instigating the debate I can further delve into the depths of this issue with all of you. Thanks for listening to me rant.
Upon entering the OSU art program I was doubtful i would enjoy any aspect of the art history series. My mom always told me stories about how terrible art history classes were and so when i finally started enjoying what i was learning i was surprised to say the least.
Back to the point....
I am a photography student and would love to hear from people in other majors who their favorite photographers are and maybe their two-cents on photography as art.
I am anxious to finally get to study some modern art and want to know if people even consider photography a fine art.
I dont know how much my fellow art history students are into photography but i would love to hear anything you have to say even if it is just "digital is better."
F.Y.I-My favorites are Diane Arbus, David LaChappele, and..well..me
-Q
I thought I'd acquaint you all with an accumulation of some of my favorite street artists, and provide links so you can check out their work. Please leave comments; I'd love to hear what you think of them all, or if you have any artists I didn't mention that you feel should be on here. Well, let's get to it...
Jeremy Fish - This bro is probably one of my favorites of the bunch. His work often comes off as cute, but it's a kind of cute that you are forced to take seriously. Definately check out his skateboards section if you really want to see the definition of thinking outside of the box.
Seen - The self proclaimed godfather of graffiti. One of the best, in my opinion, at bombing, or painting, subway cars. There are some great areas in his site that really delve into and show the process he goes through in creating his pieces. Speaking of subway cars, you may also want to check out Tag the System, which was a gallery in which several hundred small plastic trains were given to different artists, which they were then permitted to customize in any way they saw fit. Some very creative work came out of it all. If you don't feel like browsing through their bunk navigation, I am hosting several of my favorites from the gallery right over here.
Fafi - I always love to see a female in an otherwise male dominated field; and my goodness does she hold her own. Again, her work is often very cute, "girlie" as she calls it, and often sexually charged. The color and vibrancy she can put on a wall just astounds me. In her 'Walls' section, she has seperated her work chronologically, which I thought was nice; gives us a chance to watch her progression, even if we are new to her work.
Tristan Eaton - A great illustrator with a diverse style.
MARS-1 - Details, details, details. This guy pays attention to 'em. Unlike a lot of paintings, his have an ability to keep me involved for elongated amounts of time. He is also responsible for some of my favorite vinyl toys. While we're on toys, check out KidRobot. They sell a good deal of vinyl toys by artists such as MARS-1, KAWS, and Fafi. Vinyl toys have become the sculpture of the street artist. Plastic and vinyl are today's marbel and granite for some of these artists.
KAWS - Remember when I said Fish might be one of my favorites? He's up against this gentleman. KAWS recieved a skeleton key a few years back that enabled him to unlock any bus station advertisement window in New York. From that gift came the magic. He takes the advertisements home at night, adds his trademark characters, and then puts the advertisements back without anyone noticing. What I love about KAWS is his incorporation of the original ad. Most people don't even realize that he has changed the advertisements. A great story I read in an interview is that one night, while he was reinstalling one of his tagged advertisements, a police officer rolled up and watched him do it, then just drove off, assuming he worked for the city and was just doing some maintenance. Though I posted his official page, check out this gallery for more of his less than legal works.
Well, I suppose that's about all I have for right now. For my next post, I think I will do my best to get some good discussions going on tattoo art. Who's down?
Take care all. Cheers.
A few hours ago I had the opportunity to enjoy one of the most interesting lectures that I ever had in my life. Ann Hamilton is an internationally acclaimed artist who works with both performance and installation. Her work is experiential, immersive, conceptually rich and visually amazing. Each of Hamilton's installation works is responsive to a particular architectural space, and each requires a performance from the artist and the audience. That interaction transforms the space into poetry, and poetry into art. My favorite installation was the one filled the volume of the space with sound, light, and millions of sheets of paper that will fall from the ceiling. Amazing! ..If you went, let me know your favorite!
Looking at Modern Art for inspiration is what I was doing for a painting of mine when I ran across a great website pertaining to all kinds of information, biographies, and history of artists and their works of art. I was particularly interested in Picasso, Cubism and his role in Modern Art. I learned that Cubism is strongly related to African art, which now looking back at what I have learned in art history, see how this is true. A lot of African art is very geometric, even today in painting of their houses and this is what Cubism is also. The simplification of shapes into their geometric forms. Anyways I urge anyone interested to check out this website if not for Picasso then anyone else you are interested in.
I recently visited the Portland Art Museum where I saw this painting displayed, and then recognized it when it was mentioned in class. I found the painting to be very interesting, especially because it displays a type of life that may have been common to many lower class individuals at the time of its creation, as well as for the fact that it brings life to the old saying that the shoemaker's children never have shoes. As I am not an art major of any kind, I was surprised that paintings were composed around topics such as these (which I now know much more about after a few class lectures!), which leads me to my question. What became of works like this once they were completed? Were they hung up for display in the homes of upper class individuals, or were they not given much praise/notice until many years had past? Did people view works like these in order to learn from the underlying moral message presented? How were they received overall?
I went to see the Andy Warhol art during spring break and was really interested but was even more fasinated by everything else that was at the museum. Has anybody else gone? If you did, did you like it?
ARMA, or the Association for Renaissance Martial Arts, proudly presents a gallery of gore! The Historical Artwork Study provides plenty of information about weapons and fighting techniques through a romp in relevant artworks. Highly enjoyable for those with interests in visual arts, martial arts, or even just intricate etchings of entrails.
http://www.thehaca.com/arttalk/ArtTalk.htm
There is a show currently in West gallery, in Fairbanks, which everyone needs to check out. It is by painter/printmaker John Whitaker, and is absolutely amazing. It is honestly one of the best shows I have seen in West gallery this year. While the show is traditional in the sense that it is an exhibition of paintings and prints, the show is graciously much more than that. Whitaker's show becomes more of an installation of woodcuts on records and newsprint, collages combined with impasto paint and various abstract and icon paintings. One of the highlights in the show is the grouping of puppet-like creations, all hand made by Whitaker. These gothic and delicate forms are strikingly divergent to some of his prints, but still tie in to his modern sensibility.
Whitaker's show is a great example of what happens when you produce a lot of work. I have been in a few classes with John and I know he has many pieces that he did not include. Despite that, he still had an incredibly strong show. In conclusion, when you produce lots of work, you can hopefully produce a fluent, unique style that speaks as strongly as Whitaker's. So....go see the show!!!
I was wondering if anyone had any opinions on the Guggenheim in New York. I was recently told that the building was the only reason to go, but I have always looked at it as a place I wanted to visit. Is this true? If you have been there let me know!
saturday mar 19, 2005 – sunday may 29, 2005
Waking Dreams The Art of the Pre-Raphaelites from the Delaware Art Museum
(it's in the Julie Neupert Stott Gallery and the Jackie and Jerry Inskeep Gallery)
"Dante Gabriel Rossetti, Lady Lilith, 1868. Courtesy of the Delaware Art Museum.
In 1848, three young British artists - Dante Gabriel Rossetti, William Homan Hunt, and John Everett Millais - gathered together in London intending to revolutionize British art through the expression of new ideas, the study of nature, and the avoidance of the formulaic. Drawing influence from art created before the time of the Renaissance artist Raphael, the Pre-Raphaelites revived elements of the past as a counterpoint to the Industrial Revolution, referencing Arthurian legends, the Bible, ancient mythology, Dante, Chaucer, and Shakespeare.
The exhibition Waking Dreams: The Art of the Pre-Raphaelites from the Delaware Art Museum spans over 50 years of the Victorian Era. Of the 130 pieces on display, many have never been seen outside of Wilmington since their acquisition at the turn of the century."
(That's just directly from the webpage if you can't use the link)
I just thought this was a interesting exhibit to see if you get the chance. I had remembered reading about this in chapter 27 and it dawned on me when I was at pdx art museum. It's a lovely exhibit and I recommend it to all art 206 students!
here's all the info you need if you've not been to the museum before:
special exhibitions hours
sunday 12:00 pm – 5:00 pm
monday closed
tuesday 10:00 am – 5:00 pm
wednesday 10:00 am – 5:00 pm
thursday 10:00 am – 8:00 pm
friday 10:00 am – 8:00 pm
saturday 10:00 am – 5:00 pm
It's $9.00 to get in unless you would be interested in organizing a group and then it's $8.00 for 12 or more (and for the 12 tickets you buy you get a free one) so just something to think about.
group tickets Adult & seniors
(12 or more people) $8.00*
(*for 12, receive 1 free)
Save 20% off regular ticket prices for adult groups of 12 or more. Make reservations by contacting Gayle Inman at 503·276·4289 or e-mail groups@pam.org. Or fax back our convenient group form.
Enjoy!!
Creative Convocation, a new design publication geared specifically toward showcasing college & university student artwork, will debut July 2005. The quarterly magazine will feature student artwork of all forms: illustration, graphic arts, web design, photography, three-d, and more. CC will accept both general and competitive entries; the first competition is a cover for Issue One. Competition entries for Issue One are due May 3, 2005. For more information, visit www.creativeconvo.com.
The brain is capable of absorbing more than 36,000 images per hour (Hyerle, 2000).
It appears that I could add a few more slides/images to my lectures. :)
Cy Twombly has had a exhibition of 50 years of work at New York's Whitney Muesuem of American Art. The part that interested me was the description of one of his collections "a trio of 1996 engravings in monotype ink (not available for reproduction), all three titled "Lepanto," and each one a childlike rendition of a Renaissance warship. The reference is to the momentous 1571 naval battle fought between Christians and Turks for control of the Mediterranean." It is interesting to see how far "historic" and "history" art has changed over the centuries. Compare these pieces seen throughout the slide show versus the amazing detail involved in the "history paintings" of the Neo-classical and Romantic artists, as gone over in our recent lectures. http://slate.msn.com/id/2116180/
Hey guys,
I was just wondering if anyone could give me any pointers of places to go/things to see this summer. A group of us are going over early before the Rome study abroad and are traveling through Northern Italy and France before we start in Rome. Our rough itinerary is Venice, Milan, Marseille, and Paris. It'll be about 10 days, and any suggestions are much appreciated! Also, if you know anywhere else that is good to visit in the area, let me know! I heard bad things about Marseille, so if any one knows about the area, please help! Thanks a bunch!
For spring break, I spent 10 days in Paris and Belgium. It was a whirlwind trip but was truly amazing. I don't think a week spent in Paris allows for enough time to really discover the city. I must say that seeing the Louvre, Musée d'Orsay, and the Centre Pompidou museums are worth seeing. It's pretty cool to see Ancient Greek, Roman, and Egyptian art up to French Neo-Classical painting at the Louvre; Romanticism up to Post-Impressionism at Musée d'Orsay; and everything up to Contemporary art at Centre Pompidou. Contrary to popular belief, the Parisians are not rude, they just have places to be. If you can ever make the trip to Paris, go to those museums, they are well worth the money spent. It can be irritating at times when you see people taking flash photos or touching the paintings and sculptures when they aren't supposed to, but that's when it is good to turn around.
Belgium you can see in a total of three hours. From Brussels to the sea, the country is beautiful and the people are truly generous and polite. I recommend trying the real Belgian waffles and the real frites (fries). I only had two real days to spend there, but in Ghent at one of the huge churches (after being in the land of churches, the name of this specific one escapes my mind) houses a famous Flemish painting by the name of "The Adoration of the Lamb of God" by Jan Van Eyk. The churches are cold and huge, and this painting with it's bright colors made the church have slightly more personality over the other Belgian churches.
Overall, if you really want to travel and you have the time, do it! Don't hesitate, it doesn't matter if it's Canada or Europe, getting those passport stamps are worth it!
As discussed in class, Romanticism was the first 'self-proclaimed' artistic movement. What do ya'll think about that in terms of art for art's sake compared to art as a strategy to become well known and to make money? It seems that with most of the 'movements' previous to Romanticism, artists were more often than not underappreciated in their lifetimes. When someone 'creates' a new artistic movement (e.g.: Picasso and other artists declaring cubism), art seems to have taken a new face with intentions of creation. Do ya'll think the artists have just been carefully marketing themselves in the style they posess?
I noticed this flier in Fairbanks and thought people might be interested. We talked briefly in ART 205 about Jaune Quick-To-See Smith as an example of a contemporary Native American artist . She is apparently speaking at OSU later this week. Short notice, I know, but seems like a cool event.
April 6th, 2005 7pm in the C+E Auditorium, LaSells Stewart Center. It says it's free to everyone.
Sounds like she'll be discussing art as a political tool...should be interesting.
I recently studied in Europe for 4 months and I am desperate to get back on the road again. If anybody knows of any job opportunities, internships, or cheap ways to travel back please let me know. I have always been interested in Art, but developed an even greater passion for the subject since studying in Europe. I hope to live and study in Rome someday soon, so if anybody knows of any opportunities to do so, let me know.
Thanks,
Ben Newell
Hey,
I recently went to the Vatican over X-Mas/New Years and was luck enough to take in amazing works of art. I have images and am actually planning on going back this summer. If anybody else has been or plans on going please leave comments on places to go in Rome in relation to museums etc. Thanks!
Adam Bullock (art history 206)
This blog has been viewed over 300 times but only two people have posted any comments. So, I'll get you started with a "simple" question. What is art?
The word "art" comes from the Latin ars, which, loosely translated, means "arrangement" or "to arrange".
Webster's first definition of art is the quality, production, or expression, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance.
From Aristotle, art is concerned with imitation, the representation of appearances, and gives pleasure through the accuracy and skill with which it depicts the real world.
Plato states that the artist is inspired by the Muses (God, inner impulses, or the collective unconscious) to express that which is beyond appearances - inner feelings, eternal truths, or the essesnce of the age.
Immanual Kant concluded that art can only be judged by its own criteria and not by anything external to it. This was later popularized by Theophile Gautier as "l'art pour l'art" ("art for art's sake").
What do you think? How is art defined? Can it be defined?
Please, give your ideas and thoughts in the "responses" below.
