Reflection Blog

Unfortunately, I'm leaving this course on a sour note, for I'm turning in my blog a day late. I foolishly assumed the Reflection Blog would not be due until Wednesday at the earliest, as that is typically the earliest things were due, and didn't bother to check the actual due date until today. Considering I also turned in my very first blog a day late as well, perhaps it's fitting--I've gone full circle.

I expected this course to, for the most part, be about art history. This expectation was met, and I think it provided a good art history overview for me, as I had had little art history experience from the Renaissance onto Impressionism. I suppose I expected the art material explorations to be less at a beginner level, for I did not realize that so many non-majors took the course, but they were fun and challenging nonetheless. I wasn't expecting to learn about such a variety of perspectives in the artworld, such as curators and critics, so it was good to see others' points of view.

I don't think my definition of art has really changed, but I would say that my prejudices against some types of art may have lessened. I wouldn't have argued beforehand, for instance, that lowbrow art did not count as art, but I may have personally considered much of it "bad" art. From what we learned in the class/video, however, I can appreciate it a little bit more, even if it's not to my taste. I would still hold that art can be anything as long as at least one person considers it to be art, and that the "best" art typically elicits some kind of emotional response from the viewer, though it doesn't have to. 

Originally, my favorite artist was Sue Coe. I would stay say that, message-wise, she is my favorite. Aesthetically, however, I would not call her artwork my favorite. For that, I might go with someone like Rene Magritte. His artworks, beautifully painted and cleverly tricking the eye, are what I enjoy looking at the most. The ideas behind his art, as well, are thought-provoking. Learning about any of the Surrealist artists is a fun and sometimes almost eerie experience. Seeing all of the artists through the textbook and videos reminds me that Coe might be promoting a viewpoint that I strongly agree with, but that does not necessarily mean her artwork is the strongest.

I would have said that I feel much more at ease taking an online course now, but here I am turning the very last assignment in late! For some reason, I still have a much harder time remembering when assignments are due. I guess it's because I'm so used to being reminded about assignments by physically attending classes, and that does not exist for this course. I liked how I could do assignments more on my own schedule, however, having them due by midnight rather than during the day, as this semester has been very busy. I wouldn't be opposed to taking another one, though it kind of seems like students try harder on assignments when the class is not online. I had a much easier time participating, I think, because I'm generally shy in person, and I'm able to write my ideas much more easily than I can say them out loud. Over all, the class was a fun experience, that not only taught me about art, but also made me slightly more computer-savvy! 

Self Portrait Project

Paul Cezanne, Self-Portrait, Lithograph, ca. 1898-1900, 21x18"

Frida Kahlo, Self-Portrait with Monkey, 1938, Oil on Masonite, 16x12"

Horace Pippin, Self-Portrait, Oil on Canvas Board, 1941, 14x11"

 When I visited the Albright-Knox to take photographs of self portraits, I was surprised to see how much they had changed their art displays. I actually had quite a hard time finding self-portraits, and only managed to find the above three...which I suppose would be the main reason that I chose them. Still, I was always planning on using the Kahlo painting. I like how the world she creates her portraits in is very real, but at the same time feels a little fantastical. I like how her stare is so unflinching and cool, regarding the viewer with no signs of timidness or softness that is typical in female portraits.

Cezanne's self portrait would be the closest in style to how I drew my own. His, like mine, looks very sketchy, and leaves a lot of negative space around the portrait. I like how information that is unnecessary for the print fades away or is omitted, so the viewer's eye rests on his aloof expression, his clothing, and the bit of his canvas that shows. Only the information that contributes to his personality or the message he wants to convey is left in.

Lastly, Pippin's self portrait is somewhat similar to Cezanne's, in that it shows the artist at work on a painting. He, unlike the other two, however, is not looking at the viewer. Instead, he is regarding his artwork. This seems unusual for most self-portraits. I like that he has a slightly satisfied look on his face, showing his enjoyment in what he does for a living. The painting is created in a "primitive" style, but conveys just as much about the artist as the other two. 

Self-Portrait Photograph

Self Portrait Drawing, Sepia Pens

My self portrait was completed in Sepia Artist Pens of various sizes. I chose sepia rather than black because I wanted something that seemed less harsh and softer. I chose to work with pens because it had been awhile since I had used ink, and it used to be my favorite medium to work in. I love how much detail pens can create, while still looking sketchy and half-finished (in a good way). It was hard deciding on how to set up the photograph that it was based on (what angle, how close up), and then it was difficult deciding whether or not I should include anything in the background. Because I choose to draw my face fairly close up, I thought it best to leave the background blank. My head is in the lower right and I'm looking off into the upper right, so the negative space kind of functions like a thinking or dreaming space.

I wanted to represent myself as thoughtful, which is why I'm looking off as I am in the image. The messiness of the hair is pretty accurate, which I think says something of my personality that doesn't really care about such things.  As for elements and principles, the composition is fairly balanced, with the heaviness of the dark ink in the lower right being balanced by the heaviness of the black white space in the upper left. There is a lot of value in the work, achieved by hatching and cross-hatching. The sketchy linework, that goes in various directions, creates a sense of movement.

I did enjoy working on this project, though it didn't turn out quite as well as I would have liked. With pen, you can't erase your mistakes very easily, which is usually a quality I like, but I was bothered by how I made my head too long, which I think makes the drawing look a lot less like me than it could. I always have fun working on self portraits, but I have a lot of trouble judging how much the final image actually looks like me--it's easier to tell when I am drawing someone else's portrait. Now, while I am assessing my work, I sort of wish there was a little bit of a background in my portrait, like is present in the self portrait examples. A background could give a little more information about me, but I also like that I'm surrounded by empty space as I simply consider things. I'm mostly satisfied with it, but with more time I would like to work on it more, or perhaps redo it.

Exhibition Critique

I had previously and briefly looked over most of the submitted projects, but I studied more closely the powerpoints of Andi Andrzejewski, Eleanor Eshenour, and Jessica Noble. Eshenour, who seemed to make good choices when it came to artworks to exhibit, did not really give any sort of explanation for them, so I did not want to critique her work, with such a vital element missing. Noble's powerpoint did have explanations in it, but (and I am not sure if this was just my computer acting funny) all of the text boxes were jumbled together so that they were difficult to read.

Therefore, I ended up going with Andi's presentation, Art High and Low, which had an interesting concept and structure. It showed that Andi paid attention and learned something from the video we were assigned to watch, and applied it to the exhibition project. When creating my own project, I did not consider placing more than one artwork in a slide, and then comparing and contrasting them, which  was a good idea, since the theme was about the supposed differences between high and low art.

When writing the critique paper, I had a difficult time keeping my paper in the order of the "Steps of Art Criticism," which I wasn't sure if we were supposed to be doing anyway or not. Elements of later steps kept cropping up when I was talking about earlier steps, so I hope that's okay. It's not rigidly structured, but more fluid, I suppose. I also wasn't quite sure how the article was supposed to sound. Was it supposed to actually seem like a critique written in a newspaper, or something less formal that that?

I feel a little uncomfortable critiquing fellow students' work, because I feel like being critical towards a peer comes across as more offensive than a teacher being critical. I don't know if anyone will be able to see what I said, but I tried to state my opinions without coming across as too harsh. I did, however, enjoy looking at the work that everyone had done.

I am very curious about what people said (if anyone critiqued mine) about my presentation. I'd like to read what they wrote, if possible. I'm worried that I didn't present my concept in as clear a way as I should have. It would be nice if we got more feedback on the projects we do for this class, such as more required comments on the blogs. 

I would give my finished article a 9/10, unless I am misunderstanding how exactly it was supposed to be written. I tried to be thoughtful when writing about Andi's work, and do it justice. For the most part, I enjoyed this project. I did have trouble coming up with twenty-five artworks that seemed to relate to my theme (which sounds ridiculous--there must be hundreds or thousands that would work), but I hope I justified them well in my explanations. I think this is one project that I could benefit greatly from from student and teacher feedback.





leanor

Criticism Videos

The first video, Greenberg on Art Criticism: An Interview by T.J. Clark, focuses on the legendary art critic Clement Greenberg, in an interview that took place in 1981. According to him, art criticism is much more difficult than other kinds of criticism, for other kinds, like music, are much more formalist-based. He believed that it was important for critics to refute any preconceptions they may have, for "good" art can come from anywhere. He, for instance, is not "for" abstract art, but he has to accept that the best art is coming from abstract art. He talks about how he struggled for a long time with the notion of "art for art's sake." It's interesting how the interviewer, T.J. Clark, seems to argue that the things that Greenberg is talking about now contradict what he typically writes in his writing. Greenberg argues that modern art has not proved itself, and it does not need to. It's enough that some modern artists have proven themselves. Based on what Greenberg was saying, the difference of opinion between the two stemmed from the age difference, as Greenberg kept referring to Clark and those like him as "you young ones." In the forties, Greenberg's art criticism had been much more similar to Clark's tastes, but since then Greenberg has grown and no longer places history in as important a position.

In Greenberg on Pollock: An Interview by T.J. Clark, we see the two discussing together again. Greenberg talks about his relationship with Jackson Pollock, and how he witnessed his artworks' evolution into the splatter/drip paintings. Clark describes Pollock as Dyonisian, but Greenberg disagrees, at least at the ending of Pollocks's life. Most artists, he believes, get quieter toward the end. He also says how important it is no not prescribe. Pollock was self-aware enough to know that he could not create masterpieces while using a brush. Greenberg believes that the paintings that "fail" are the ones that feel like effort, though he is quick to say the mark of a failed painting is by no means one where the effort involved is palpable. He discusses how those he considered the "best" artists felt isolation, where as now (1981)artists have become celebrities. They had yearned for fame. He also comments on death being "an overrated literary idea," romanticized by some, but scoffed at by him. In the end, he calls Jackson full of it, like everyone else, for becoming enchanted by the idea of a romantic death as well.

An Introduction to the Italian Renaissance focuses on the artists that are accounted for in Giorgio Vasari's Lives of the Artists. The video emphasizes how it's important to understand the context of artworks. One cannot simply compare Giotto and Michelangelo and declare Michelangelo the better artist, for if not for the innovations of Giotto, Michelangelo and other artists would not have had them to build off of. Giotto, for instance, gave paintings life through using perspective and using real people as models. While his buildings may not look realistic, he was one of the first to use buildings to convey depth. Ghiberti built off of Giotto with his sculpted panels that paid attention to the human form. Through "guilds," skilled people come together to improve themselves and teach apprentices their trades.  This is how they are able to build off of each other. Masaccio made the leap from portrayng the physical to portraying the emotional as well, such as in his painting where grief-stricken Adam and Eve are cast out of Eden. Later artists introduced new ideas such as Greek mythological subjectmatter and structured composition.

The Critics: Stories from the Inside Pages focuses on critics from many different fields, and how they benefit society. It showed short clips first of movie critics, then music critics, then television, then book critics, emphasizing that their goals and similar across the different fields. The purpose of mass media critics is to stop and make people think about what it is they are listening to/watching/reading. They often create the prism through which the media arts are then seen. Through their writing, people are more likely to not just absent mindedly consume media without thinking about it, and they may direct consumers to things they are more likely to enjoy. Criticism is also an art form in itself, that people read/watch/listen to for its entertainment value. One of the loftier goals of critics is to have an impact on whatever field they're criticizing. If enough critics feel a certain way, they can have an influence. Or, they can "discover" new artists, who go on to fame. This is particularly true with book critics, which have a more difficult time being "discovered" on their own with the general public.

Of course, critics, and especially effective critics, have to have a love for the media that they are criticizing. They typically have somewhat obscure artists they love, that they enjoy spreading the word about. Some critics also have to where the hat of the reporter, where they interview people or write a piece on a new trend. This might blur the line between the objectivity of the reporter and the subjectivity of the critic. This can make the relationship between the artist and the critic uneasy, a critic may need to interview an artist that they gave a negative review for.

There is a difference between the critic  and the reviewer. The former assumes the reader has already seen the subject of the criticism, while the latter assumes that the review is introducing the reader to the subject of the review for the first time. For the critic, knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation are elements that often come into play in their writing. They must have a deep, wide knowledge that they apply to individual artists/artworks. It is important for them to write in an engaging manner for whoever their audience is, and to recognize the social connections that exist in whatever is being critiqued. Unfortunately, much criticism has been "dumbed down" and has become much more like reviewing. Well written, thoughtful criticism takes up too much time and too much space. With less research time, there is the danger of the critic allowing his/her preconceived ideas to dismiss things that might have more merit than they assume. The internet has become a place for them to flex their critical muscles without a lot of the obstacles that exist on tv, newspapers, or magazines.

The Colonial Encounter: Views of Non-Western Art and Culture is about the way to NOT go about exhibiting work. At the 1900 World's Fair, western ethnocentrism portrayed art from what they considered "savage peoples" whom they had colonized. The Dahome exhibit featured a tower of sacrifice, portraying the people as barbaric and in need of civilizing by the French. Algeria, which had long been colonized, emphasized the exoticism and tourist appeal that the western world felt toward it. Their exhibit was meant to advertise Algerian settlements. Arabicity became defined by sexual bellydancing. Studies of facial features were meant to emphasize the inferiority of non-western races. Unfortunately, the 1900 World's Fair and exhibitions since then are created to fit prejudices that the western world already holds.

Lastly, Jackson Pollock: Michael Fried and T.J. Clark in Conversation brings us back to the beginning, with Clark discussing Pollock again. Clark believed that avant garde's importance came from its historical role, whereas Fried believed its importance came from being completely independent of its history. They agree there is a dispersing of energy that is very optical rather than tactile. While the two critics/scholars approach the painting in different ways, their conversation shows how the individual person brings their own personal baggage to their interpretation of a painting. One is struck by the fragility of Pollock's Lavender Mist, but the paint-membrane is more energetic than the other. In front of Autumn Rhythm, the two continue their conversation, discussing Pollock's painting in relation to abstract art. The two debate over whether the painting was intended to express certain ideas while Pollock was painting, or if he never explicitly thought at such things while creating.

The videos, particularly The Critics: Stories from the Inside Pages, mostly related to art criticism and what we need to think about and look out for while becoming critics ourselves.  The Critics literally went into what one needed to do to become a "good" critic, while others simply showed art critics at work, so we could see what sort of discourse they took part in, which was the case for the first two and last videos. The Colonial Encounter was a video that showed the mistakes and prejudices that art critics and exhibitors have fallen into in the past. It demonstrated how caution and respect for other cultures is very important when critiquing and exhibiting their art. The Italian Renaissance video showed how important learning historical context was for the critic, for artists did not develop in a vacuum, so nor should critics. All of the videos would be helpful when trying one's own hand at becoming a critic, but The Critics will probably prove to be the most helpful to us, as it went into detail about how to go about writing criticism, even if it did not discuss fine artists at all.

As most of the videos focused on different topics related to art criticism, most felt quite useful. Unfortunately, the quiet volume and the dry material made the first two and last videos hard to watch, and therefore hard to glean  from. While Greenberg is a fascinating person to read about and listen to, it was difficult for me, even with the volume up all the way, to understand what he and Clark were saying. Still, it was good for us to hear what professional, critical discourse and debates looks like. It almost makes me wish we could have more of a debate in the class, over instant messaging or something like that.

Interspecies Understandings Powerpoint Exhibit

Creating this exhibit was a little harder than I was expecting. I divided up my exhibit into four parts, beginning with a human-animal relationship where humans attempt to dominate and exact war on animals, then a relationship where humans simply use animals for their own gain, then where humans care for animals as pets, and finally a more equal relationship where humans actually see themselves in animals.

I had the most trouble trying to figure out how to relate all of my chosen artworks together through the elements and principles of design. I hope that we didn't have to do that too much, because my artworks vary quite a bit, though I tried to make them flow together and place similar ones next to each other. They definitely have a lot more in common through theme than elements and principles of design.

When choosing the artworks, I seemed to work background. The last part of my exhibit were the artworks I chose first, because that was the part I was interested in the most, and what I was already the most familiar with. I hope that my theme doesn't come off as too crazy sounding, or offensive to anybody. I just find it interesting how human-animal relationships have evolved over the years--not that it's been completely linear. I wanted to include cave paintings in my powerpoint, which would show how long humans have been having meaningful relationships with animals, but then I realized that this would probably not make sense, as I would not be able to drag cave paintings into a real, physical exhibit.

My artworks went from being by mostly men to being by mostly women. I'm sure there are more examples out there of men relating to animals on a profound level, but I was having difficulty finding any. Also, I was interested in exploring the unique connection women have with animals through the experiences they both share. For my powerpoint, I gave the slides a fur-textured background, invoking the idea of animals. I almost switched the styles between my four sections, but then thought that maybe it was better to keep them unified. I chose a font for the titles that was both a little fancy and a little loose looking, which was meant to represent the unification and merging of human and animal worlds. I hope people enjoy it, or let me know how to improve it!