Ceramics, Multiples, Justin Novak, and Gabriel Orozco

Tea Pot I made for my mom

This week Brian Gillis spoke to us about ceramics and the concept of multiples. I have always had an obsession with ceramics because I think it is such a beautiful medium to work with, and it is very hands on. It a medium that is very interactive because you do use tools, but it all has to deal with how you shape with your hands to mold the clay. An aspect of ceramics that I never really thought about is the concept of multiples. Gillis told us that a multiple is a three-dimensional work that is intended not to be a unique work of art but an editioned original. I interpreted this to mean that although the original is made, it isn’t made to be unique because it is going to be made over and over again. Because it is going to be multiplied it loses its purpose to be unique, but it gets a new purpose to be an edition of what was original. He also spoke to us about concepts of being a multiple. For instance Marcel Duchamp and his ready-made art. The idea behind ready-made art is to take an object that was already produced and turn it into your own art. For example Duchamp took a urinal off of the wall signed his name on it and put it in a gallery setting. It isn’t the object that is more important it is the idea behind the object. He also spoke to us about how the industrial process used to make something makes it a multiple. I find this to be very interesting because the object doesn’t necessarily have to have copies to be to a multiple. Just the fact that the process used to make it has the potential to make more copies makes it a multiple.  This connects to the first artist I am going to talk about, Justin Novak.

Justin was a student at the university of Oregon. He is an artist in that mainly works with ceramics. When asked why he likes ceramics so much he said, “ I love ceramics because there is the possibility to make more. There is a certainty of one but the possibility of making more.” I find this very interesting because it has to do with what Gillis talked to us about the industrial process. I think that it is a very profound statement because you wouldn’t think that to be a reason to love ceramics, or any medium of art for that matter. When I hear that it makes me think of the potential that any art has, and the potential that anyone can make art. That’s what makes art so beautiful, the potential that it has. An idea that Justin Novak plays with in his art is the idea of bringing tragedy into beauty. He makes typical and traditional porcelain ideas but then adds something really strange to it. For example his beautiful sculpture of a woman cutting her skin with scissors. He explores sad ideas and adds them into something beautiful. Another aspect of ceramics that Justin Novak explores in his work is the element of interaction. Ceramics is a type of medium that you can hold and touch, and something that you can play with. Another artist that explores this idea is Gabriel Orozco.

            

 Gabriel Orozco is considered a contemporary artist but he goes against the typical serious mindset of most contemporary artists because he is very playful. He likes to provoke space for thinking and he does this playfully in his Ping Pond Table where makes a four sides ping pong table with a pond in the middle of it instead of a net. The piece of artwork makes you want to touch it and play with it, just like ceramics. Its like when you see little figurines in your grandmothers house of little cats, or women or shoes. You don’t just look at it, you want to touch it and hold it, and interact with it. He makes things that you want to play with, such as his art in the super market. For instance he took cat food cans and placed them on the extremely organized pile of watermelons. He felt that the super market is a perfectly organized place and when you move something you can feel that something is wrong. He wants to interact with the world and ask questions, and this is what contemporary artists do.

            Understanding contemporary media is something that someone can never fully do. No one has the answer to all of the questions, because everyone has there own questions. I feel that we start to understand it when we understand why artists choose their medium, and how mediums can cross over. Through out this class I have learned just because you claim yourself to be an artist in a certain medium, you can actually be a jack-of-all-trades. Contemporary media to me is making art in the medium of your choice to make work that can inspire people, can be interpreted in many ways, and a piece of artwork that provokes thought and questions.

Sculpture, Louis Bourgeois, Richard Serra and "Just Looking"

Sculpture at the University of Oregon in front of Straub Hall

This week we talked about sculpture, and professor Amanda Wojick spoke to us about women in sculpture throughout the last century. She discussed with us about the two tracks that sculpture takes and that it's on a spectrum. The spectrum is between. Abstraction and representation. Abstract is based off of somethin real and a representation is an exact replica. The difference betwee. Sculpture and other mediums is that there are infinite amounts of ways to approach the art and many materials available to use. There is also a giant spectrum that these pieces of art can fall on and I think this is truly unique to this medium. How the sculpture is made and what it is made out of changes the meaning of the work and how the work of art is perceived. This medium can also help abstract the work the work of art. Even an exact replica of something is abstracted because of the materials that are used. When're something is abstract or representative is also based on the view point of the audience. There is going to be a difference between the viewpoints of someone who passively looks at the work and someone who actually takes the time to look at it. The differences between how people look at piece of artwork changes where each person sees where on the spectrum of abstraction and representation the artwork belongs.

An artist that Amanda Wojick spoke to us about is Louis Bourgeois. She is a sculptor that highly bases her artwork on her childhood. At first she would carve her works in wood but "she began to execute her work in rubber, bronze, and stone and the pieces themselves became larger, more referential to what has become the dominant theme of her work- her childhood" (art21.com). Many of her works "are charged with sexuality and innocence and the interplay between the two" (art21.com). Although her artwork reflects her childhood I feel that it is very dark. For instance her giant spiders. I do find it interesting the size of her artwork. Although I cannot truly experience the artwork, because I cannot experience the size and he space, I try to understand it and grasp it. This goes back to how people see it. It's different to experience just a photo and to experience the actual piece. You can't really form your opinion on the abstraction or representation of a piece unless you are physically there, or else you don't truly see it. This also goes for Richard Serra's artwork. He is also a profound sculptor. "Serra's work has become famous for physicality, one that is compounded by the breathtaking size and the weight that the pieces have acquired" (art21.com). A lot of his works are placed in public areas which changes the way that his pieces are received. There would be a difference between his artwork being in a gallery and in an open populated area. It's just like how different materials are going to send a different message because it us truly a different experience. When we his pieces of art in the places that he puts them we can compare it to the buildings around it a truly grasp it's size, but it still depends on how people look at it.

In "Just Looking" by James Elkins we explore what people do when they are looking. Through out the reading be takes a closer and closer look at what looking is. His main point is that when an observer looks at an object, they aren't just looking, you can't just solely see. Looking is more like hunting because you are looking for something that catches your eye but you are subconsciously sifting through everything you see. Even though you may be passively looking at something, your brain is still processing it, you still think about it. When you are looking at something there is always more than just looking involved and the object always looks back. This doesn't necessarily mean the it's actually looking at you with eyes, but same with physical looking, there is always something more deep than what is on the surface. When and object looks back it is sending it's message. To everyone this message is different because to everyone abstraction and representation of a piece is completely different because people have different perspectives. Sculpture is a Uniates medium because a lot of different factors determine how a piece or work it perceived. It's a combination of the space the work is in, the size of the piece, the materials used and how people view the work. Sculpture is a fascinating medium because of it's open potential to be analyzed and perceived.

Crafts, Aspects of Production, and John Feodorov

Braided Bracelets I Made

This week in lecture we were spoken to by Anya Kivarkis, a professor here at the University of Oregon. Her specialty it metal smithing and crafts. I was very excited this week to talk about crafts, because crafts are something that I do all the time, especially during the summer when I am the only one left at home when all of my friends leave for college. Crafts are something that I have always been interested in ever since I was little, so this week was very near and dear to my heart. Anya talked a lot to us about types of production; original copies/handmade reproduction, re-productions, mass production, and postproduction. Original copy is the original craft, the originally made piece. This is when the true meaning and look of the piece of art is going to show. It’s the master piece that can potentially help with the other types of production. It is also taking an idea that may have already been used, but you make it yourself. This is the kind of work that I do. I make my own original handmade pieces or jewelry and braided bracelets, but I have seen them made before by other people but they are still my original work. An example of an original copy is Roy McMaken and his reproduction of his grandmother’s living room. Its made from memory, and its not necessarily accurate but the mind does wondrous things. The flaws between the original and the replication is what makes it art.  I don’t use others pieces to make my own. This is my favorite because it is truly original. Re-production is when you make something from an original copy. The beauty of this is that something are left out from the original copy and some things are lost. When these things are lost they make something that’s basically new. It’s somewhat original but not completely. Its just like most art, a lot of it is original but maybe the idea and some of the aspects the artist got from other things people have though of. An example of an artist that reproduces things is Schoken. This artist takes a piece of jewelry and makes a mold to reproduce it but uses the mold as the piece of artwork. This shows the flaws and problems that occur during production. The next aspect of production is mass production. This is when you make a bunch of copies of something. An artist that kind of plays with this is Allan McCollum. He took a table and on it placed 10,000 pieces on the table that were all different. He kind of plays with the idea that things are mass produced, because when you look at the table from afar everything on it looks like a copy of each other but in reality it is all different. Another aspect of production is postproduction. It takes something that has been produced and uses it to make something else. It uses ordinary materials and cultural objects to make something new. An artist that does this is Maarten Baas. He takes furniture and burns them. the remnants from doing this is the artwork. My favorite aspect of production is original pieces, but it is also interesting to think that a lot of art isn’t completely original and what decides what things are art and what isn’t. Most people would think that crafts aren’t art. I talked about this in my post o about fibers. I always thought that crafts were kind of a form of art but I guess a lower grade than real art that is meant to be shown. Crafts are shown in people’s houses or given as gifts, but art is shown in galleries and looked at by art fanatics, not just by your mother. The difference between art and crafts is the hierarchy and the meaning of the two words. Art is higher class than craft, meaning that art is more valuable than crafts are. But who decides what’s precious and what isn’t? Most people follow the same thoughts about what is and what isn’t precious but who defines that? It’s the hierarchy that has been set up in our society that kind of decides it for us, but what’s sacred and precious to some may not be to others. An artist that plays with this idea is John Feodorov.

“John Feodorov was born in 1960 in Los Angeles of mixed Native-American and Euro-American descent. Brought up both in the suburbs of Los Angeles and on a Navajo reservation in New Mexico, Feodorov early experienced the cultural differences between his dual heritages” (art21.com).  I think that this background definitely influenced his artwork because he grew up in both a typical household and a household that people wouldn’t expect to be typical. “His work addresses this clichéd modern archetype through a humorous interjection of “sacred” items into recognizable consumer products. His kitschy Totem Teddy series, for instance, added masks and totemic markings to stuffed toy bears accompanied by booklets declaring the bears to “meet the spiritual needs of consumers of all ages!” (art21.com).  He wants to express that people are still stereotyping Native Americans, but they are just like typical and other households in the united states. He plays with the idea of what people think are sacred and what aren’t. He takes not so sacred objects and tries to convince people that they are sacred. This connects to who decides what is sacred and precious, and what is not. When he takes something not typically Native American and adds stuff that are it makes people think that its sacred because stereotypically Native American items are sacred.

Environmental Artwork, Death of the Author and Kiki Smith

Environmental Art by Alan Sonfist

There has always been a separation between humans and the nature that surrounds them. there is this slight disconnect between humans and nature, because humans as species has this notion that we are better than all other forms of life on this earth. Between this disconnect is where we find environmental art. Most people when they hear environmental art they think of landscapes and trees, but through lecture this week I have learned that it is much much more than this. In lecture this week we were told that “not everything is art, but everything is art supplies.” I felt this statement truly described what environmental art. This art doesn’t necessarily have to be of nature, but it can also use nature to construct it. In nature we can find a vast selection of types of materials that we can use to make art, and environmental art expresses this.  In lecture she also spoke to us about her own artwork, and how she used ants to help her spread ink on her paper or canvas, she uses the nature around her to help her come up with the art, which is a big and very cool aspect of this medium. When you separate yourself from the reality of what you are using, and just use it you can make beautiful art. The lecturer also asked a question I thought was very significant. Is a piece of work more powerful when it is obviously political or if it is subtle? Honestly I think is mostly depends on the audience but I also think it is more powerful when it is subtle. When artwork is subtly political it sends a stronger message. I think this message is stronger because when it is obvious the attention is somewhat directed towards being obvious rather than the actual message. When the message is subtle, it will not hit as many viewers at once but the viewers will start to see the message. Although I believe that subtle messages are stronger this is not always the case. It depends on the circumstances.

           

 This connects to what Roland Barthes is talking about in “Death of the Author,” He says that there will always be a separation between the artist and his piece, and the separation between the piece and the audience. In this separation is where there is room for interpretation. Yes artists do have intentions about what they are trying to express, but when an artist can let go of his work, it will allow the piece to build its own identity. The readers and audiences build this identity. What Barthes is trying to get at is that everyone will interpret the art differently and everyone will read it differently. The author/artist dies when the readers start to interpret it and write their own story behind it. Its like symbols, they have built in meanings that artists/authors cannot change, but the meanings are different to everyone. The artist doesn’t hold the sole interpretation but there is some wiggle room. People may have similar interpretations but everyone makes their own story. This is when the death of the author occurs, because the readers become the author.

             
An artist in this field is Kiki Smith. She was born in Nuremburg, Germany, but grew up in New Jersey. “The recurrent subject matter in Smith’s work has been the body as a receptacle for knowledge, belief, and storytelling. In the 1980s, Smith literally turned the figurative tradition in sculpture inside out, creating objects and drawings based on organs, cellular forms, and the human nervous system” (art21.com). She uses sculptures of human organs to represent the nature of the human body. “Life, death, and resurrection are thematic signposts in many of Smith’s installations and sculptures” (art21.com). She also uses the natural cycle of human and animal lives to show the beauty of nature. She is an artist that takes the natural aspects of life and makes environmental art from it. When we see these artworks we are allowed to interpret our own meanings, and this is the beauty of this medium.

Interactive Digital Art, David Byrne, Paul Pfeiffer, and Janet Cardiff

 

Interactive Art by Markus Lerner

In Lecture this week John Park spoke us to about interactive digital art. At the beginning of the lecture I was honestly a little bit confused about this medium and what it entailed. It was odd to me that an audience was involved to make this art possible. Interactive art is a form of installation-based art that involves the spectator in a way that allows the art to achieve its purpose. Some installations achieve this by letting the observer or visitor "walk" in, on, and around them; some others ask the artist to become part of the artwork. This concept is very strange in both a good and a bad way. John described to us that technology isn’t about use and entertainment anymore, but it has become a life style. I feel this is very relevant with this type of medium because works of this kind of art frequently feature computers and sensors to respond to motion, heat, or other types of input their makers programmed them to respond to. I think it is a very trippy and very cool concept that fits into our society today. Because technology has become a lifestyle I feel that this type of medium has become a lot more accessible and easier to relate to. I would never have thought to consider this a medium of contemporary art, but once you really look at it, what these machines and technology can do is truly art.  One thing John also mentioned is that it is kind of hard to find the art in this type of medium. Its not traditional like the other mediums I have discussed, like painting and drawing. This medium is made possible by the knowledge of technology and technological innovation. I find it to be a very difficult medium because technology isn’t a simple thing to learn, such as painting. An issue with interactive art is who is the artist. The person who made the technology or is it the people that are involved. I think that the person who came up with the idea and also made the technology is the real artist in this medium. Because other people are doing the performing and being tracked by whatever technology is being used there is a gray area of who is the artist. But I feel that there would be no art if the technology was not built or set up by the technician and true artist.

           

 An artist I found in this field is Markus Lerner. He wanted to show traffic patterns through interactive light art. He set up seven light towers on the side of the road in Germany that each had more than 100,000 LED lights. “The waves at the bottom of each panel represent the amount of traffic that has recently passed, while a “spark” that flashes across each screen whenever a new car passes by. The more cars that pass the sensors, the bigger the waves, and the faster the motion” (technabob.com). I think this art piece is very interesting and also shows how technology runs our society. Automobiles are technology that has control over our society today. Everyone has a car, and if they don’t they take public transportation that will also add to traffic. This piece shows how our society has turned to a technologically advanced but run society.

           

An example of an interactive art installation is Playing the Building by David Byrne. “Playing the Building is a sound installation in which the infrastructure, the physical plant of the building, is converted into a giant musical instrument. Devices are attached to the building structure — to the metal beams and pillars, the heating pipes, the water pipes — and are used to make these things produce sound” (davidbyrne.com). this piece deals with who is the artist. Is it the person who plays the piano to make the noises from the building or is it the genius that came up with this idea. Honestly I think it is the persons who built it and thought of this that is that true artist. An idea that David Byrnes discusses on his website is the concept of interactive art. He says, “One doesn't have the same experience when reading a description of it—one has to be physically present to really listen” (davudbyrnes.com). I think this is what makes this medium so great. With other mediums you can see a picture of it or a description and you can basically understand the experience, but with this medium you truly have to experience it yourself. You can’t understand this art unless you actually interact with it.

Another artist that deals with this concept is Janet Cardiff.  She has a concept of walks that she sets up. “The format of the audio walks is similar to that of an audioguide. You are given a CD player or Ipod and told to stand or sit in a particular spot and press play” (cardiffmiller.com).  an example of this is her project Her Long Black Hair. “Her Long Black Hair takes each listener on a winding, mysterious journey through Central Park’s 19th-century pathways, retracing the footsteps of an enigmatic dark-haired woman” (cardiffmiller.com). The only way that this project works is if people participate in it, otherwise it is really pointless.  You also won’t understand the story behind the locations unless you listen to the audiotape. It is a big part of this medium that people participate in it, and that is the best aspect of this medium.

           

Paul Pfeiffer is also an artist in this medium. “Pfeiffer digitally removes the bodies of the players from the games, shifting the viewer’s focus to the spectators, sports equipment, or trophies won” (art21.com).  He does this to “dissect the role that mass media plays in shaping consciousness” (art21.com).  This connects to the idea that technology is a life style because media is a type of technology. Media and technology is a main part in our life, and Paul Pfeiffer’s artwork deals with this and kind of goes against it. Interactive digital art is a very strange but fantastic medium of art that most people wouldn’t even consider as art. It is also a kind of art that interprets and is easily connected to how our life style is today.

Photography, JR, Alfredo Jaar, and "Photography as a Weapon"

Photo Manipulation done by me

Manhattan Beach, CA taken by me

    In lecture this week we were spoken to by Craig Hickman, a long time photographer. He told us all about different photographers and how they manipulated the lighting and what not to change the way that the picture would come out, but what truly interested me was his viewpoint on photography. When asked why he liked photography he replied, “I like photography’s relationship to the world, because no matter how transformed it is, the photograph is still believable.” This response was really strange to me because how could it have a connection to the world if in many cases the photo has been altered. But then I realize that photography is the medium that is the least removed from reality even if it is altered in some way. Any other media takes reality and makes it into not reality because it completely changes it. For instance the three media I have already talked about; drawing, digital art and fibers. All can make realistic things but none of them are actually the real thing, they are merely based off of it. A photograph is the next best thing to the actual item, because it is an actual image of it. The fact that photography is so realistic brings up the controversy of photography. Is it considered your art just because you took a picture of it. Hickman discussed this dilemma with us and basically said that the problem is whether or not you made it or if you are merely just documenting it.  I believe that photography belongs to the person who took the picture. It was the person who took the picture who decided what lighting to use, at what angle to take the picture, and many other aspects that went into taking the perfect picture. You were the person who choose to document it so it’s your own work.

            

 One artist in this profession is JR. “JR is an anonymous photographer and artist. In his work, he embeds into neighborhoods, favelas and villages around the world, photographing the people who live there and learning their stories” (http://blog.ted.com/2010/10/20/meet-jr/). He takes picture of the people portraying their own caricature. These people come from troubled cities but he posts large pictures on buildings and walls of the local people being silly. He takes on social problems, such as the Middle East Conflict where he posted pictures of everyday citizens of Israel in the region of Palestine, and the other way around. He also put up pictures of women in the dominantly male run Africa. I think his work is not only risky but also very touching. He takes world conflicts and shows that the people living through them everyday can still be themselves. His art tells a story of the people who are not necessarily seen on the news. Because he uses photography as his medium he can tell a real life story, and the message gets through better than if he would have used a different medium.

            

 Another photographer is Alfredo Jaar. “Jaar explores the public’s desensitization to images and the limitations of art to represent events such as genocides, epidemics, and famines. Jaar’s work bears witness to military conflicts, political corruption, and imbalances of power between industrialized and developing nations” (art21.com). He uses photography to expose some of our worlds problems that first world countries do not necessarily know of or have heard of. Jaar says, “ [he] always [tries] to incorporate an intellectual and emotional element because [he] [likes] to create different entry points for the audience.” (art21.com). He uses a combination of text and photography to get his true meaning out. The hopes that people don’t ignore the text but actually engage in it so that they know the story and background of the photograph. I think his work is very moving, because a lot like JR he is exposing things people don’t necessarily know about, and may be too hard to talk about. He uses his photography to show the reality that is in this world, which is a great aspect of photography as a medium.

            

 Both a flaw and an attribute of photography is the ability to manipulate photos. Its pretty easy to do so, and I have easily taught myself how to use Photoshop and have easily been able to change different aspects of photographs.  The article “Photography as a Weapon” discusses the problems with photos that are published. For example “various major daily newspaper published, on July 10, a photograph of four Iranian missiles streaking heavenward” (http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com). A very observant blogger noticed that the fourth missile was Photoshopped into the picture, and porrly and obviously Photoshopped. The thing about photography is that it is so easy to change. In magazines it is easy to make women look thinner then they really are, and prettier than they really are. Its an ethical issue that is highly discussed. I feel that when people look at photography they should consider that the picture may be altered in some way. They shouldn’t take pictures so seriously, even though it is the closest medium to reality, there is a chance that it may not be 100% reality.  

 

Fibers, Sara Robinowitz, Anna Voog, Ann Hamilton and Cai Guo-Qiang

Crocheted Hat by Anna Voog

 Many people would not consider fibers to be a type of medium for art. When I think of fibers I think of clothing and weaving and sewing not a form of expression and something really cool to look at. Surprisingly fibers is a truly interesting and beautiful form of art. Sara Robinowitz, a professor of fiber at the University of Oregon, lectured to us about the difference between art and craft. This truly fascinated me. I always thought that crafts were kind of a form of art but I guess a lower grade than real art that is meant to be shown. Crafts are shown in peoples houses or given as gifts, but art is shown in galleries and looked at by art fanatics, not just by your mother. The difference between art and crafts is the hierarchy and the meaning of the two words. Art is higher class than craft, meaning that art is more valuable than crafts are. Professor Robinowitz also talked about fibers is an art that doesn’t really show all that is gone into it. Unlike painting and sculpting, where you can see little details and kind of how it was made, fibers is a finished project. The finished product doesn’t necessarily show the labor, sometimes hard and lengthy labor, that went into making the very impressive piece of art. Most of the time the piece of art looks simpler than is really is. Fiber and cloth have always have cultural significance. By the process by which a fabric is made, or the designs on it you can tell what part of the world it is from. Also with fiber you can tell how expensive the artwork and fabric is because of what it is made of. Fibers has had great cultural effects.

           An artist in this field is Anna Voog. Anna Voog is a musician, visual asrist, and writer from Minneapolis, Minnesota.  Her career with art started with performance art. She set up a webcam that she names Anacam, which filmed her in her house 24 hours a day. She wanted to live her life openly by doing this. While doing her Anacam she got into crocheting and making freeform art with fibers. She would then use her webcam to sell her pieces of art. He pieces of work are very interesting, often times being crazily crocheted hats. Some look like caterpillars and snakes, but others do not really seem like it is supposed me anything more than a really crazy design.

        

      Another artist of this medium is Ann Hamilton. “Ann Hamilton was born in 1956 in Lima, Ohio. She trained in textile design at the University of Kansas, and later received an MFA from Yale University” (art21.com). Her work has often times been considered installation art, meaning art that is supposed to transform the audiences perception of space. Most of the time this is done in the interior of a building rather than the exterior. When asked about her art being called installation art she replies, “ I think the form, for me, of working in installation is one that always implicates you actively within it[…]it's that you're coming in and you're in some instances animating the space, and the process is often very social; for me, that part of it is very satisfying. There's a way that it (the installation) has an ongoing life as it meets the public. Every moment that it's up it's different. It's different from moment to moment, and somehow it's that live time that's just a factor of the form really, or something that is characteristic or inherent in the form is something that makes it continually interesting for me” (art21.com). I find this very interesting that her art is social. It is a new idea to me. Both that she uses fibers and the fact that audiences somewhat get involved in the making of her art. Each day the art piece is shown reactions are different which is a really interesting concept.

  
 Another artist in fiber making is Cai Guo-Qiang. “He was born in 1957 in Quanzhou City, Fujian Province, China, and lives and works in New York. He studied stage design at the Shanghai Drama Institute from 1981 to 1985 and attended the Institute for Contemporary Art: The National and International Studio Program at P.S. 1, New York” (art21.com). With his artwork he wanted to confront the “controlled artistic tradition and social climate in China” in his art he uses chance and luck to decorate his canvas. For instance his artwork made our of gunpowder going of. The designs is made were made randomly. He states, “I had a streak of bad luck in 2003-2004, and it was told to me repeatedly—through various ways. Bad luck or unlucky things, are in themselves a work—it is a work of a very neutral nature” (art21.com). His work is very random, but is unique and truly amazing. Just because fibers isn’t a done with paint, pencil, paper, or canvas it is a medium of art.

Digital Art, The Vocabulary of Comics, and Chris Coleman

icon drawn on Adobe Illustrator by me

Digital art entails characters and icons that are drawn out on the computer in programs like Adobe Illustrator and Photoshop. Michael Salter of the University of Oregon is an artist of this profession. He started out as a designer for multiple surf companies but later became a professor at the University of Oregon and started displaying his digital artwork in art galleries. During his lecture I attended he discussed the idea of the character and icons. The idea of the character is everywhere, there are characters in advertisements, posters, comic books, boxes and many other things that we see everyday. Characters are icons that often try to influence to buy something, or that are just totally random and have no meaning. Some of these icons we can see plastered all around town such as graffiti and random posters, and some are meant for us to question. As Michael Salter said that the logic behind many of these characters and icons don’t really make sense but they still make art. The great thing about the character and icon is that they don’t need to make sense to be art and because they don’t really have a meaning behind them people can guess the meaning or make up something that is meaningful to them. Characters and icons are simple, and often times less is more. The picture is the meaning and is the only thing that shows the meaning, it isn’t spelled out.

            To me a comic book is a bunch of pictures put together to tell a story, kind of like the saying a picture is worth a thousand words. In a comic, the pictures set up every aspect of the story it is trying to tell. They represent the setting, the characters and everything that is the essence of the story being told. In other words the pictures are the most important part of a comic. The idea that we relate to these pictures, of people who barely look like us is a profound idea looked at in “The Vocabulary of Comics” by Scott McCloud. He discusses many ideas in his comic book about how people react and how people recognize the pictures that we see in comics.

The idea that when we cartoon objects, we focus on specific details rather than eliminating details is very true. As we make the cartoon version of whatever we are drawing we take away many details to make it more recognizable. I feel we take away these details also to make it easier to relate to the object. Say it’s a cup of coffee; everyone would know a cartoon drawing of a cup of coffee, if the cup were simple most people would be able to relate to it. When you add detail, such as what kind of coffee, not everyone can relate because of differing opinions. When we lose the distinct details that differentiate between different types of products we can start to make a “universally” relatable drawing.

            This relates to the happy face. We all know that a circle with two dots and a line makes a face. Everyone around the world will recognize that. When we look at the simplest cartoon face it makes me feel like drawing is a universal language. Most people will understand drawing of a cat and dog and will instantly know what it is. No matter how simple the drawing most people with understand. I believe that pictures and drawings are the stepping-stones towards a language that everyone can understand, and I think that this is profound. Drawings are their own language that everyone can understand, and comics are books that are universally understood as well.

            An example of an artist who does digital art is Chris Coleman. He makes physical art, digital art, sculpture and video. He makes a lot of art that is random and maybe doesn’t make sense to a lot of people. Such as a series of animated videos that show a house with some sort of flashing light in front of it called “My House is not My House”. The artist has a meaning behind it but it’s so plain, simple and ambiguous that viewers can come up with their own meaning behind it. Coleman uses his art to spread messages, kind of like a universal language. The same message isn’t necessarily spread to everyone, but a meaningful message is still sent. Everyone understands a message, so it’s essentially a universal language.

Drawing, Art Theory for Beginners, and Margaret Kilgallen

lion drawn by me

          The art that we all do and look at today and in the past couple centuries is considered modern art. This era started when painting and other media were used as art rather than a purpose. What I mean by that is it was made to enjoy and ponder rather than just portraits and sculptures of religious or rich figures. The modern era started when our society was industrializing and developing rapidly. “Modernism valued ideals of uniqueness and progress, while responding to the new, fast developing and changing industrial world” (pg 99). Within the modern art era there many different art movements that were still considered modern art. There is Futurism, Vorticism, Dada, Surrealism, Abstract, Formalism, and many others. Modern art is anything that was different than the art in the past. Society was changing and the artists wanted to reflect the new changes in their art. “[I]deas of tradition and history were rejected; what modernists wanted was originality and newness” (pg 100). It was a whole new idea that reflected and responded to the 

modern change. 

        One type of the modern art is surrealism. Surrealism means “transcending the real” which is exactly what these artists did. “Surrealist artworks, although often stylistically different, showed an interest in the unconscious, in chance, in sexuality and the taboo” (pg 102). A lot of surrealist art was derived from ideas written about by Sigmund Freud in The Interpretation of Dreams. This book completely changed people’s thoughts of the human mind and the unconscious. “The surrealists wanted to tap into their unconscious, and even employed techniques that were used in Freudian analysis” (pg105). This type of art consisted of writing your train of thought exactly as your thoughts change, or scribbling and rubbing and making random marks because that is what your unconscious is telling you to do. It is art that isn’t made from something real, it is what your unconscious is telling you.

           
Drawing can be a method used to make modern art. Drawing is defined as the graphic representation of something. I think that drawing is much more than that, and also has the potential to be much more than that. As Laura Vandenburgh said drawing doesn’t necessarily mean pen or pencil, it can be anything that makes a mark. I found it interesting that a jetty that makes a design in the ocean, and landscaping is also considered to be drawing. When I hear drawing I think about sketching and doodling, not rocks and plants. Drawing is also very different than other types of art media. It shows everything that went into making the final product. It is also a medium that is used to plan out projects for other medium. It is a medium that works on its own or used to aid with another type. There are a wide variety of things you can do with drawing which makes it way more than a graphic representation of something; it can be anything that makes a mark.

            One artist that entails drawing in Margaret Kilgallen. She is an artist that was born in 1967 in Washington DC. “Kilgallen has a love of things that show the evidence of the human hand.” She is an artist that draws directly onto walls, and makes murals the size of rooms. She intends her art to “recall a time when personal craft and handmade signs were the dominant aesthetic.” Not only does she do art in galleries she does them in communities. Often times her murals portray women that seem to be heroines, or dominant figures. She states, “I do paint a lot of women and I do have a lot of heroines, as well as a lot of heroes too. But I definitely paint more women and I think maybe it's because I'm a woman. I like to paint images of women whom I find inspiring.” I also find these women inspiring, and also aesthetically dominant. When Kilgallen does art in the community she lets the community help her. The art that Margaret Kilgallen does is inspiring and also gives back to the community. She uses drawing to show that woman can be dominant figures as well as men. Margaret Kilgallen uses the drawing medium to show her version of modern art.