Final Blog Post!!!

In the final reading of our text and the last couple classes, we have discussed the inter-relationship or the interconnectedness of man with animals and technology. I stressed the idea of "networks", and how humans are made up of cellular networks but also how we interact within broader definitions of the term network. These days within the art world there are theories that center on man as a cyborg or the idea of man as a hybrid type of machine...this is due in part to our ever growing dependence on forms of technology...we are connected to our cell phones, laptops, mp3 players, which are in turn connected to much larger networks...and it is this connection that links our human flesh and bone with circuits and wire...therefore mingling our souls with machinery....something to think about!
In class we watched both Tim Hawkinson and Mel Chin on art21. Both artists use technology in their art works...Hawkinson, incorporating more crude, mechanical or kinetic elements that reference the human body and Chin using science and advanced technology as primary elements in his work. These two artists, although working in different ways, talk about the human condition in their works...social communities, our own bodies, emotions, and environmental concerns in our immediate surroundings. Take a moment to revisit those links and look over/read their work and info then respond to one or more of the following :

How much do we model the systems/structures we make-whether freeways or the Internet-upon systems within our own bodies?

Because of ecological changes as well as technological changes, how is art different now from art work created in the 1950's?

How do these two artists above, show us the good and bad results of man's fascination with machines?

Do you believe that you are interconnected with much larger systems of knowledge and networks and that in some ways you rely on machinery/technology as much as you rely on your body?

Blog Post # 6

In the past week we started talking about Romanticism and Romantic era landscape paintings by Hudson River School Painter Thomas Cole and his peers. We learned that this style of painting was simply about showing beauty and the awe in confronting the sublime within nature.

We also looked at a two photographers, Robert Adams and Ansel Adams. Robert Adams became interested in documenting how the western landscapes of North America had been shaped by human influence. Much earlier in the 20th century, Ansel Adams began creating fantastic black and white photographs of the west before man's intrusion. All three of these men had a similar focus when dealing with their subject matter...beauty.

Take a moment to click on the links then compare and contrast these artists...Respond to one or more of these questions when you compare/contrast.

Please explain how each of these people represented the landscape.

What makes them different besides the medium?

Did they have different agendas in their art?

Is it enough in our current culture to just pursue beauty without any other content attached?

This post requires a mandatory response from you the student...If you are unable to post a comment here, I expect a solid paragraph in hard copy format...thats paper for you non-blog comment people. No handwritten responses.
Due Date: 9:00 am, this Friday morning.
No late papers or comments accepted!

Blog Post #5

Called by The New Yorker art critic Peter Schjeldahl "the most efficacious American political illustration since 'Uncle Sam Wants You,'"Fairey created a series of posters supporting Barack Obama's 2008 candidacy for President of the United States, including the iconic "HOPE" portrait. He also created an exclusive design for Rock the Vote. Because the HOPE poster had been "perpetuated illegally" and independently by the street artist, the Obama campaign could not risk any direct affiliation with it. Although the campaign officially disavowed any involvement in the creation or popularization of the poster, Fairey has commented in interviews that he was in communication with campaign officials during the period immediately following the poster's release. Fairey has stated that the original version featured the word "PROGRESS" instead of the word "HOPE," and that within weeks of its release, the campaign requested that he issue (and legally disseminate) a new version, keeping the powerful image of Obama's face but captioning it with the word "HOPE." The campaign openly embraced the revised poster along with two additional Fairey posters that featured the words "CHANGE" and "VOTE."
Fairey distributed 300,000 stickers and 500,000 posters during the campaign funding his grassroots electioneering through poster and fine art sales. "I just put all that money back into making more stuff, so I didn't keep any of the Obama money," said Fairey in December 2008. In February 2008 (ten months before Election Day), Fairey received a letter of thanks from Barack Obama for his contribution to the campaign. The letter stated:
"I would like to thank you for using your talent in support of my campaign. The political messages involved in your work have encouraged Americans to believe they can change the status-quo. Your images have a profound effect on people, whether seen in a gallery or on a stop sign. I am privileged to be a part of your artwork and proud to have your support. -- Barack Obama, February 22, 2008"

In January 2009, the "HOPE" portrait was acquired by the US National Portrait Gallery and made part of its permanent collection. It was unveiled and put on display on January 17, 2009.

...Shepard Fairy appropriated this image from an associated press news release photograph...A large percent of Fairy's works originally start out as images that he is culling from TV, newspapers, magazines, and advertisements. He then takes the images and makes stencils by enlarging and then tracing them. The stencil is then used as a template where he spray paints through it to leave the image where ever he may choose. Fairy comes from a graffiti background, where this process was used for "tagging".

In February of this year, Shepard Fairy is opened his first ever major solo exhibition at Boston's Institute of Contemporary Art.

Does Shepard Fairy's use of images from the media change how we see him as a legitimate artist? Does Mr. Obama's comments in his letter to Fairy help legitimize this way of working?How So?

Are images from the media open to change and public use?...by changing them slightly, are they now different images or "new" works then?

Artists throughout history studied their subjects and looked at objects when painting them...If current theory says we encounter life through fragmented reproductions, then is Shepard Fairy doing what simply comes natural for an artist today? Take a position and explain...

Your Project:

The student will use an existing artwork that is well known and change the context and/or the content of this work. Making it a “new” artwork.

This can be accomplished through:

use of the computer (photo shop, paint)
collage
hand drawing
photo copier

Due: Next Monday…3/16

Mid Term Break

STUDY...RELAX...TAKE A BREAK.

Blog Post #4

Up to this point we have looked at mediums, material usage, artists, Formalism, and a broad understanding of our current perception of art and how it is defined. The second half of this course will deal with more complex and specific frameworks that involve contemporary art. We will also be reading chapter 4 of your text to further help us understand how we, the viewer, come to derive meaning from works of art.

On Monday we will watch Janine Antoni on art21 and she wonders if the viewer would be able to pick up bits of the stories, that she felt were embedded in the materials she used. She talks about her work and the underlying ideas and symbolisms behind them. When we see objects like Ms. Antoni's "Eureka",which is actually a bathtub filled with lard that she made an impression of her body in, we often wonder...what is this?...why would anybody do this?...and is this really art?! But, hearing her explanation and how it is related to a story about Archimedes, we understand the piece more and also accept the piece as what constitutes art.

Currently in Kipp Gallery, just outside our doors, we have an exhibition by Clayton Merrell. In Mr. Merrell's own words, he says the work is "landscape painting" and "hopes that the viewer will be a little confused and begin to ask questions". During my installation of this exhibition with Mr. Merrell and from hearing his lectures, I came to understand how the formal qualities of his work are tied directly to the content. I would like all of us to explore this exhibition, think about all the elements that make this work up, and use it as a point of discussion on the blog and also for some carry over into our class. As we talked about, meaning changes by the way we encounter art work, and for many of us, we only see art as images on pages or computer screens, so lets take advantage of this exhibition...please take the time to visit the gallery and look at the installation yourself and then respond to one or more of the questions below.

When you visited the gallery did you understand what the artist was trying to communicate, or what the art work was about...the content?

Does the written word add to the public's experience of art? What helped you in this specific installation?

Is something written that accompanies the art work necessary?Do writings, like an artist statement or explanation on a wall, limit our experiences in an exhibition? How?

Once you understood the content of the installation were you more interested?
What aspects of this installation did you find interesting...formal qualities?...content?...material use?

Did the exhibit appeal to you in an aesthetic way?

Blog Post #3

In the past couple classes you have been introduced to the basic art elements and the principles in which they are composed, structured or organized into a work of art. We have seen that these concepts within the language of art are arranged into a composition so that they can make sense to the viewers. These elements and principles are the visual tools that an artist uses to lead the viewer's eye around an art work. Looking at art through this particular framework is called Formalism. In Formalism you are concerned with only the visual elements of a work of art.

Although contemporary art relies on frameworks that are attached to much more conceptual issues, it is still valid (and a great place to start) to recognize the strictly visual elements and principles that the artist has employed. There are many artists who believe that understanding the formal elements leads to understanding the content and other deeper conceptual ideas about a work of art.

In your text book, chapter 2, you will find a list of 6 questions(they are the same ones I had in my lecture) that I want you to use to help you respond to one of the pieces of art posted either above or below. Ask yourself one or more of these questions and respond to how the artist has used certain elements and principles. People are bound to see things differently so it is OK to respond differently to the same question that another has responded to. Sometimes, as I have seen from your many comments, it is easier to sit and think first, then answer the question in writing...this format allows that to happen...and in turn helps strengthen your ability to verbalize your ideas. Keep your list of elements and principles handy and visually observe the compositional structure of one of the pieces...comment by using one or more of the questions from the book or make your own observations. Be brave...help yourself as you help others through your comments. The images can be seen larger by clicking on them. ...Top image: Jeff Koons...in order of appearance: Frank Stella, Georgia O'Keeffe, Wendy Walgate, Barry mcGee..google these artists if more info is needed.