Monday, February 23, 2009
After Life
I found this movie entertaining. It was interesting to see different people's lives and how they felt about them. The fact the people had to pick their favorite memory and they would only be able to remember that seems awesome. It would make the after life so nice. I couldn't imagine having to pick my favorite memory from my life time. There are so many memories that I would want to be stuck with. The way they relive their memories seems neat but I just don't see how it could be like the real thing. The people who work at the "facility" could be considered artists in the way they analyze the memories and find the right things to help the person relive it. All of the people in the movie seemed to be happy with the way their memories are reenacted. To me it seems that these memories could be portrayed in so many different ways down to the smallest detail but they seem to be just right the way the people recreate it.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
20 Lines
This project at first seemed silly just drawing all these lines. But as I drew the different lines it felt liberating to go with the brush wherever i pleased. The lines were just regular marks on a paper but each one invoked its own special emotion. The soft, circular lines made me feel relaxed but the hard zig zag lines made me feel rambunctious. I liked this project because there was no technique that needed to be used, it was only my eyes, my hand, and my mind.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Growing Up Online
Before "facebook" and "myspace" I feel social networking was different in that people used to meet up at a certain spot after school or on the weekends. (i.e. a burger joint). It then seemed to shift to the phone, where everyone is tieing up the phones with three way and call waiting. I feel the big start in the change of social networking was Instant Messenger. I remember my mom asking me, "do you call anyone anymore?," because everyone would always get on IM after school and just like that school life spilled over into home life.
If I were to describe facebook to a friend who has never seen it, I would tell him it is basically a place where people can stay in contact with their friends and share interesting links and really just stay in tune with all the gossip. It keeps people in the loop on whats going on and its also a place for people to let out different feelings. For example a person might put as their status, "I'm so tired from work today." Do people care? Probably not but people just do it to put their feelings out there to someone.
I've explained it to my parents before and I only mentioned that it helped you stay in touch with your friends since most of our friends are spread out over the country due to college.
I think it would be a lost cause trying to explain it to my grandparents. I would basically tell them it was a newer way of talking to your friends than having to call everyone. It makes it easier to talk to more people at once. I would basically say the same thing to a teenager in the 1950's because they ARE our grandparents.
The facebook page I looked at reveals all of the persons interests, photos of the person, and what other people are saying to this person. You can get a view of what the person is like through what they put down and how other people talk to them. The fact the person has a self-taken picture made me want to look at their profile cause I think it is stupid to take a picture of yourself and put it up. I would not want to friend or message this person because they seem, in my opinion like an idiot. They dont seem like the kind of person I would associate with. I want to know if this person is actually worth knowing.
I feel it does compartmentalize images and the way you broadcast about yourself because it gives you certain spaces to put your interests, photos, and conversations.
I believe that McLuhan is right because on any given page people put what they want you to know about them or they put up pictures that make them look more attractive. People can delete wall postings and news alerts if they don't want people to see them. Facebook is a way that a person can put themself out there and yet lead you to believe they are someone they may really not be.
I felt this documentary was ridiculous. Yes there are dangers online but that is where we need to educate kids and teenagers on safe useage but allow them to keep their privacy. I had feelings of legitimate anger when the mom of one of the kids told all the other parents about things she saw. Frontline blows the internet use by many kids out of proportion picking only the kids who really spend alot of time on it. I do not personally know one person who is online as much as the kids in the documentary. Like I said before, the documentary was ridiculous.
If I were to describe facebook to a friend who has never seen it, I would tell him it is basically a place where people can stay in contact with their friends and share interesting links and really just stay in tune with all the gossip. It keeps people in the loop on whats going on and its also a place for people to let out different feelings. For example a person might put as their status, "I'm so tired from work today." Do people care? Probably not but people just do it to put their feelings out there to someone.
I've explained it to my parents before and I only mentioned that it helped you stay in touch with your friends since most of our friends are spread out over the country due to college.
I think it would be a lost cause trying to explain it to my grandparents. I would basically tell them it was a newer way of talking to your friends than having to call everyone. It makes it easier to talk to more people at once. I would basically say the same thing to a teenager in the 1950's because they ARE our grandparents.
The facebook page I looked at reveals all of the persons interests, photos of the person, and what other people are saying to this person. You can get a view of what the person is like through what they put down and how other people talk to them. The fact the person has a self-taken picture made me want to look at their profile cause I think it is stupid to take a picture of yourself and put it up. I would not want to friend or message this person because they seem, in my opinion like an idiot. They dont seem like the kind of person I would associate with. I want to know if this person is actually worth knowing.
I feel it does compartmentalize images and the way you broadcast about yourself because it gives you certain spaces to put your interests, photos, and conversations.
I believe that McLuhan is right because on any given page people put what they want you to know about them or they put up pictures that make them look more attractive. People can delete wall postings and news alerts if they don't want people to see them. Facebook is a way that a person can put themself out there and yet lead you to believe they are someone they may really not be.
I felt this documentary was ridiculous. Yes there are dangers online but that is where we need to educate kids and teenagers on safe useage but allow them to keep their privacy. I had feelings of legitimate anger when the mom of one of the kids told all the other parents about things she saw. Frontline blows the internet use by many kids out of proportion picking only the kids who really spend alot of time on it. I do not personally know one person who is online as much as the kids in the documentary. Like I said before, the documentary was ridiculous.
Monday, February 9, 2009
Scrapbook 1
I found this empty matchbook out back of Montgomery Hall. It was sitting open on
the ground, obviously because someone was done with it and decided to liter. It caught my eye because it was dark out and its white cover stood out against the brick. This matchbook is an example of an everyday commodity that people use. It was probably used to light cigarettes which, sadly, is a major part of our society today. It has no markings or designs on it. It is rather plain. Usually matchbooks have designs and such on the cover. I feel it is not art because no one made it with the intent for it to channel their feelings or for anyone elses enjoyment. It could be used to produce art but it is just an everyday commodity. No deeper meaning to it.
the ground, obviously because someone was done with it and decided to liter. It caught my eye because it was dark out and its white cover stood out against the brick. This matchbook is an example of an everyday commodity that people use. It was probably used to light cigarettes which, sadly, is a major part of our society today. It has no markings or designs on it. It is rather plain. Usually matchbooks have designs and such on the cover. I feel it is not art because no one made it with the intent for it to channel their feelings or for anyone elses enjoyment. It could be used to produce art but it is just an everyday commodity. No deeper meaning to it.
Monday, February 2, 2009
What is the purpose of Art?
I like the idea of art as a way to escape from dull reality and let your mind go wild for a fleeting moment. Art really expresses emotions that may be hard to express through other ways. Not only does art let a person express themself but it lets others express themselves through enjoying the art. It makes sense when Waldemar Januszczak recounts his visit to the slides at Tate Modern and talks of how everyone was connected with the sheer simple emotion of joy. Art could not be explained better. Looking at art, playing on art, making art all have the same effect on people. It allows their minds to forget about what may be going on in their lives and lets them enjoy a moment of pleasure in what they see. Art, I feel, does have a healing power and it provides a place where everyone is equal. There are not biasts in art. There are so many different colors and shapes all working together to make one unique statement. What is the purpose of Art? It allows for one to loose themself for a moment and slip away in wonderment and awe, away fromt he crazy place that is our world.
Art21 Viewings
Vija Celmins came off as a bit weird when I first watched her section. She was stuck on this one painting and had been for years. It was a painting of space with thousands of little stars. To me, it seemed ridiculous to just paint a black surface with thousands of white dots and on top of that repeat it numerous times. But as I listened to her talk and explain her painting I realized it was an escape for her. She enjoyed it just as much as any of us enjoy our favorite things. Waldemar Januszczak talks about in "What is Art for?," that art is a way people to escape from their dull normal lives. Her space picture does exactly that for her.
Elizabeth Murray struck me as a person who would put graffitti on the side of a run down building. As we looked deeper into her and her art I realized she basically does graffitti. She goes into it with a rough outline but ends up freelancing it. She never seems to be satisfied with her work always trying to find ways to make it better. She uses shapes and colors that are attractive to the eye and at the same time boggle its onlooker. The shapes she uses seem to be polar opposties of eachother but yet they flow together in a way that makes is beautiful. She talks of how painting is so physical with her. The feel of the paint and the way she can shape and form things to make them flow seem to help her loose herself in her work. Again we see and example of how are just seems to relieve the physcial and mental stress of life.
Ann Hamilton was my favorite artist. The way she used the cameras in the mouth to show us speech, if you will. It was incredible. It makes you think when you are talking to people that I could see this person in a whole other way. Her other work such as the lines being drawn backwards as the image is projected onto white sheets gives almost a calming feeling. It allows for ones mind to kind of disappear in awe. Her art seems so out there but yet she is still a grounded individual. Hamilton's work just seems to be relaxing and is able to just take a persons mind and take it somewhere else for a few moments.
Bruce Nauman's work is a little weird but yet extremely intriguing. He takes everyday chores or occurences and somehow makes them art or at least leads you to see them as art. He talks about how some is accidental and some is planned. He kind of proves that art can be anything. It is just the way it is viewed. What I thought was interesting was when he talks about making sculptures that seem to have no function when tried to use the way one thinks but somehow people always find different ways to use it. For example the stairs that form a W does not serve any really helpful purpose but many people have found different uses for it.
Matthew Barney's work is just straight weird. I do not even know what to think of it. I guess it is art in the way he puts everything together so that it expresses a deeper meaning. He uses many provacative things in his films and there seems to be more to it than is implied. Each action has a distinct way of helping tell the story he is portraying. I dont see it as art in the way that it is relaxing and takes your mind away from reality. It is too much involved for that.
Elizabeth Murray struck me as a person who would put graffitti on the side of a run down building. As we looked deeper into her and her art I realized she basically does graffitti. She goes into it with a rough outline but ends up freelancing it. She never seems to be satisfied with her work always trying to find ways to make it better. She uses shapes and colors that are attractive to the eye and at the same time boggle its onlooker. The shapes she uses seem to be polar opposties of eachother but yet they flow together in a way that makes is beautiful. She talks of how painting is so physical with her. The feel of the paint and the way she can shape and form things to make them flow seem to help her loose herself in her work. Again we see and example of how are just seems to relieve the physcial and mental stress of life.
Ann Hamilton was my favorite artist. The way she used the cameras in the mouth to show us speech, if you will. It was incredible. It makes you think when you are talking to people that I could see this person in a whole other way. Her other work such as the lines being drawn backwards as the image is projected onto white sheets gives almost a calming feeling. It allows for ones mind to kind of disappear in awe. Her art seems so out there but yet she is still a grounded individual. Hamilton's work just seems to be relaxing and is able to just take a persons mind and take it somewhere else for a few moments.
Bruce Nauman's work is a little weird but yet extremely intriguing. He takes everyday chores or occurences and somehow makes them art or at least leads you to see them as art. He talks about how some is accidental and some is planned. He kind of proves that art can be anything. It is just the way it is viewed. What I thought was interesting was when he talks about making sculptures that seem to have no function when tried to use the way one thinks but somehow people always find different ways to use it. For example the stairs that form a W does not serve any really helpful purpose but many people have found different uses for it.
Matthew Barney's work is just straight weird. I do not even know what to think of it. I guess it is art in the way he puts everything together so that it expresses a deeper meaning. He uses many provacative things in his films and there seems to be more to it than is implied. Each action has a distinct way of helping tell the story he is portraying. I dont see it as art in the way that it is relaxing and takes your mind away from reality. It is too much involved for that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)