Wednesday, February 23, 2011

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 Original copy is the original craft, the originally made piece.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.

Thursday, February 17, 2011

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.

Wednesday, February 9, 2011

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.



Wednesday, February 2, 2011

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.