Beauty In the Lens

"Bonus" essay

2011-12-19T22:49:00.000-08:00

Dirty Underwear; the Day the Music Died & the Death of Art

Flowers- Andy Warhol- Pop Art

QUESTION: Is there a parallel between art and popular music and, can you
pinpoint the moment in time when art either died or began to show signs of
weakening and, if possible; if there are no gods without believers, then can
art exist without necessity?

SUMMARY: Okay, so for this final essay I wanted to combined what I have learned about art from the course, from browsing the internet and ideas I had running through my own head to answer this question. This question was the most "fun" to answer. However, I found myself going in different directions while writing this essay. what else is new?

REASON: I think the reason you asked us this question is so we can look at how art has changed since the days of painting on cave walls. Yes, it is important to learn about the history of art and how it all began, but equally important is how the history of art affects the future of art. Can anyone say the vitruvian wave? Also so we can examine how art has changed since we've been alive.

PURPOSE: I think the purpose of asking this question is to get us thinking, as always. By asking this question and throwing in the big "is art dead?" theory it makes us look at art in the big picture. The whole class was devoted to art and it's roots; but now art has been absorbed so much that we now question is strength in the world.

DIRECTION: I had no direction in answering this question. I was googling and thinking my way to the answer.. if there even is an answer to end all questions.

IMPRESSIONS: I think the best part of researching and writing this final essay was my realization that "art" can never just die. I won't let it die or disappear. Art has many purposes to many different people. Art is a universal language. Art is a way is the same as love and even when you can't see or define the word love you know it's there. Whether we like it or not art has become part of human nature.

Rolling Stones cover- Annie Leibovitz- Photography

THE ANSWER:
Before jumping into my long and twisted response to this essay question I will state the basics before I lose my train of thought. I do think there is some parallel between art and music but what is considered "popular"? Music is a form of expression that can be created through the actions of a human, same goes for art. They will always have that in common. Both art and music have different styles and their history goes way back to ancient civilizations.

As far as the whole at what point did art die or weaken; I just can't seem to wrap my head around that. Art may not seem so intricate, original, and jaw dropping anymore because of how it has changed but art is more alive and real than ever before. Art is being recognized, taught, and supported. People are coming together and collaborating for art. Art is now a part of medical studies. Art has a definition. Some young adults even strive to be considered "artsy". Art is not dead.

My thoughts towards whether or not art can exist without necessity are mixed. "There are no gods without believers." I can understand how this quote relates to art and why it would make people question art's existence. However, religion is more abstract than concrete, it is a way of thinking. Art, to me personally, is more physical. Art is a necessity but it is also a luxury of self expression and freedom...which to most of us is essential to be happy or feel fulfilled. I may be contradicting myself here.

Starry Night- Van Gogh- Oil Painting

People always question what art is. The Random House Dictionary define "art" as "the quality, production, expression, or realm of what is beautiful or of more than ordinary significance." Some say art is something human made that combines creative imagination and technical skill the satisfies the innate desire for order, harmony, and beauty. (Art History)

"Art is making something out of nothing then selling it"

-Frank Zappa, American composer

Like I have stated in previous essays, art is something different to everyone yet universally the same. Art is purposeful to those who use it to express, portray, or make a statement and art can also be completely useless, but available to anyone who wants to enjoy it. Whether it's painting, drawing, sculpture, design, photography, even poetry and music it all boils down to a three letter word. Art; and it is here to stay.

One of my favorite essays..still needs tweeking.

2011-12-02T10:39:00.000-08:00

ESSAY 7b

Discretionary and Disposable

QUESTION: Look back on the art of the last 4,000 years that we have just explored and, if it can be truly considered an asset to humanity, how was it ever considered discretionary and, if ever, disposable?

SUMMARY: I was instantly excited when I read this question; I knew this was the next essay question I wanted to answer. The "asset to humanity" bit really caught my eye. This essay question really stems back to the first few pages of notes we took in class. "There is no such thing as art, only artists."

REASON: The reason you asked us this question was first and foremost to reflect on everything we have learned this semester about the history of art and how art is still relevant today in our own lives. This question strongly relates to the class because it is basically talking about what we learned.

PURPOSE: I think the purpose of asking this question may be a little unclear at first. Asking if we think the historic art we just learned about is discretionary or disposable is quite intricate. How are we to say if it is or isn’t?

DIRECTION: The very first step I took in answering this question was retrieving the accurate definitions of “discretionary” and “disposable” and figuring out how they are used in art context. Once I figured that out I then began thinking about whether or not I thought art was considered an asset to humanity. As an artistic person I had no trouble answering that question.

IMPRESSIONS: I found it challenging to describe my thoughts in this essay. I found myself wanting to ramble on about how art is an asset to humanity more than whether or not historic art was discretionary or disposable.

THE ANSWER:

After looking back on the last 4,000 years of art that we have just explored, there is no doubt in my mind that art as a whole can truly be considered an asset to humanity. Not only has art structured the history of humanity but it still surrounds us in this day in age, art is everywhere.

Fada Art (link is to my facebook where I posted the photo)

[Not to get off topic.. but the background image on my blog is a piece of art work that I bought at an art festival a few years ago. It is actually paint on a thin piece of wood and it cost me three bucks. I loved the words so I took a picture of this small piece of wall art, and edited the image so I could upload load it onto the internet…I think is has a lot of relevance to this essay.]

Art can be used for building, teaching, expressing, and recording; as well as modern art therapy. There are many forms of artistic expression and mediums. Art plays into our religion, media, communities, education, pleasures, hobbies and careers. If art isn't an asset to humanity then I don't know what is. Art is alive, it is real, Art isn't just a religion it is a way of life. I do not know how I feel about the whole "there is no such thing as art, only artists". I can maybe understand that quote when it is applied to there being no such thing as religion, only believers. Art is more concrete than religion is, right? Now I am getting ahead of myself.

As far as art ever being considered discretionary, I can see two sides to this statement. As a Libra, I am all about balance and weighing things out. I believe some forms or practices of art can be discretionary where some are more straight forward. Yes, sculpture and architecture is usually concrete metaphorically speaking; there usually isn't much questioning for the viewer. Architecture and sculpture is usually for a purpose. However modern abstract paintings and 3D art isn't so crystal clear. I feel like modern art is more discretionary than ancient art. As far as having meaning or value, I think art has a purpose in our lives.

For example the Egyptians, they used very utilitarian forms of art and architecture. Also the Greeks, with their terracotta pottery. Even though this ancient art was not "artsy" as some people ignorantly identify compared to today's standards, it was still a form of creative expression. (Refer back to my blog post with photos from the RISD museum, looks pretty creative to me) In all honesty I have mixed feelings. Maybe art as been and always will be discretionary. Maybe what we consider to be ancient art was never "art" to the ancient people; maybe it just was there. At the end of the day "art" is what you make of it, it can be anything a person wants it to be and that is the beauty of it.

Last but certainly not least is the word disposable. After looking up the all the similar definitions of the word disposable I think I can understand why you used the word in this essay question. Art is not something that should be taken for granted, if anything it should be shown more respect. Art should not be thrown away but it should be readily available to anyone who wants to embrace it. Anyone can scribble, splatter paint or snap a photograph; but not everyone can see the beauty and meaning behind it. Artists see things in a different way. We see the world around us as one giant composition or to some a blank canvas. Like art, humans evolved, so maybe it is wrong of me to say the ancient people didn't know they were making "art". After all they were alive and creating long before I was. Maybe the definition of art has not changed only gotten broader.

Sheldon Art Gallery

People are fascinated with art. "Art is food. You can't eat is but it feeds you."(Fada)

Art was created for a reason, let's just enjoy it.

Better late than never I suppose..

2011-11-21T14:19:00.000-08:00

ESSAY #3a

This and That

QUESTION: How are Egyptian, Greek and Roman art and architecture both interconnected and yet independent and; How did they collectively or independently affect the development of art in the Early Christian period?

SUMMARY

When I went to go answer this question I experienced a lot of thought processes. I wanted to show how these three different forms of art were connected yet very different and unique. So then I began reviewing my notes and readings from my art history book to find the evidence.

REASON

I think the reason you asked us this question is because it is important when learning about art history and history in general that you’re able to see connections between different forms, eras of art or events and miles stones in history. This essay topic specifically relates to the course because we are constantly learning, researching and making connections to what we discover.

PURPOSE

I think the purpose of you asking us this question was so we could better understand this period of time. By looking deeper into the subject matter, and analyzing what we already know to come to a conclusion, it reinforces the material we learn in and outside of the classroom.

DIRECTION

The direction I took was immediately opening my text book and note book. I began to look at the Roman, Greek and Egyptian art work. I looked for similarities, whether they were physical similarities or similarities in purpose. Next I looked at the development in the Early Christian period and how the art contributed to that period of time.

IMPRESSIONS

One of my biggest “Aha!” moments was when I realized how these three different styles of art are so similar. In their own way they are working towards a similar goal; basically a utilitarian, religious and expressive purpose. However, I did find this essay a bit challenging to answer because everything is so related.

THE ANSWER

In life we make connections to better understand the world around us as well as our past. As humans, we often like tangible things and sometimes fear the unknown. So to be asked “How Egyptian, Greek and Roman art is interconnected and yet independent?” is an intricate question to dive into.

Egyptian (left) Greek (middle) Roman (right)

(I don't know why the links aren't working properly)

I grouped together photos of Egyptian, Greek, and Roman art to help compare and contrast..

From observing these photographs of wall art one can detect that all three art works convey important people, ideas, or concepts in their civilizations. Each style is very unique but the general images are for a similar purpose. Notice how all three show a relationship between people and or animals. Like anything in life time passes, people and things evolve and grow; and we begin to take inspiration from our surroundings.

“The Late period in Egypt saw the country and its art in the hands and service of foreigners. Nubians, Persians, Macedonians, Greeks, and Romans were all attracted to Egypt’s riches and seduced by its art.” (Art History, pg.79)

Egyptians in my eyes were the trend setters of their time. People took what they wanted from the Egyptians and turned the art into their own. Even the architecture and purpose was more or less borrowed. The Idea of the pyramids, after life, and honoring the pharaoh was a general concept that was spread to Greece, Rome, and many civilizations after that. Symbols and funerary architecture from helped developed the iconography that we see repeated in much of the ancient art and early Christianity. Temples, sanctuaries, and monuments were big in Greece, but they were not a new concept. From Greece, the Romans got inspiration and revived Greek classical ideas; the Romans were wonderful at sculpting portraiture. Concepts of the Egyptian after life, the Greeks fixation on truth being beauty and the Romans realists ways have been thrown around and developed over time. This is shown mainly in sculpture; the Egyptians sculpting what the want to look like in the after life, Greeks sculpting what they should or want to look like in present life, and the Romans sculpting what they really do look like. (Art History)

I am finding myself getting off topic quickly here but everything is so interconnected it's just blurring my vision of answering this question..

Egyptian Architecture (left)

Greek Aechitecture (middle)

Roman Architecture (right)

As far as how they affected the early Christian period, I think it was more a group effort. Yes, each style of art has their own unique trait, but because of the strong influence on each other, they collectively affected the early Christian period. As "art" developed and ideas were being shared in Europe, there was an explosion of knowledge, creativity and religion happening. As the Christian period began, it had all of this collected styles of art to work with. That is why im my opinion some of the Christian art is so beautifully crafted.

Early Christian Art

What I came across at RISD..

2011-10-27T16:13:00.000-07:00

(sorry I don't know how to rotate the photos on blogger)

Art History Essay #2 .

2011-10-14T11:29:00.000-07:00

Neolithic reproduction of Catalhoyuk

ESSAY #1b Perception and Reality

QUESTION: Is it possible for a modern viewer’s "perceptions" to either create or alter the "reality" of a specific Neolithic Period cave painting or carving?

Part 1

Summary: In attempting to answer this question I experienced, yet again, another look into my own mind on how I felt about this question. I wanted to research a valid explanation that agrees with how I feel about this. To me, anything can be perceived differently than what it really is like in reality. So in answering this question, I felt I could put a lot of my opinion in; whether my opinion is accurate or not it does not matter because isn’t that the point of these essays?

Reason: I think the reason for you asking us this question on perception and reality is to spark some sort of excitement in our minds, just like asking any open ended question. Because perception and reality are so often confused and altered to begin with it really forces us to look within ourselves for the answer.

Purpose: Besides sparking our minds to think, the purpose of asking us this question is also to get us to look more closely at the Neolithic art and how others are reacting to it. It seems that everyone has something to say about everything these days; reviews or comments or insults; everyone wants to voice their opinion. Also by asking this question, we can be the “modern viewer” and test this question by asking ourselves what we think the reality of a specific cave painting or carving is.

Direction: The direction I went in with answering this question first started with me. Before I go to Google or flip through my text book I like to ask myself the question and see what I theory or explanation I can come up with on my own. I do this for two reasons; one, being that I want to be able to think for myself and use my existing knowledge, two, being that I get easily distracted by Facebook, twitter, and stumble upon once I open my internet browser. Next, I simply looked at numerous pictures of the Neolithic cave paintings and asked myself “what do I think the purpose of the painting is?” and “what do I think they really mean?” Then I opened my book and found is hugely help for because at first I was a little confused about the differences between Paleolithic and Neolithic art. Once I understood the difference I better understood why this question was being asked.

Impressions: The most memorable part of answering this question was how much I let my imagination take over. I started to lose a sense of what I thought the Neolithic reality was. Were these violent paintings the reality of what these people were experiencing or were they a depiction of their imagination. What If the art was just simple utilitarian paintings and that’s it. What if all of our modern day input was, excuse my language, bullshit. If the prehistoric people could be alive today would they laugh at our crazy perception of their art, and entire existence for that matter? To us the ancient world is mesmerizing, but do we ever build it up to be something that it’s not? As an Art major I enjoy learning and viewing any artistic creative form, but are we letting ourselves get carried away? Then I began to freak myself out by thinking about what the future people could dig up about us. What happens if we became “prehistoric”? Then I snapped out of it and typed my essay.

Recreation of the original city plan of Çatal Höyük.

Part 2, the answer:

To start off, my answer is yes. Yes, I think modern day viewer’s “perceptions” absolutely create and alter the “reality” of Neolithic cave paintings and carvings. Hardly anything in life is concrete and has only one reality. Almost any perception can be altered simply because we as humans all think differently and see the world around us differently. No one living today was around in 8000 B.C.E to interpret and inform the rest of us what was really going on during the Neolithic revolution. I think as humans, we like tangible things that make sense; some of us fear the unknown. Good thing some of us are problem solvers and like to put together the puzzle. Just because we are problem solvers by nature doesn’t mean any one of us are correct. I could look at a painting of large deer charging towards human figures and see a spiritual piece of art work, they guy next to me could see a potentially cool bloody battle scene.

Houses and Shrines in Catalhoyuk, Turkey

In the Neolithic period people began to settle, build homes and continue to live off the land and its food supply instead of being more nomadic. A good place to start is Chatal Huyuk in the Konya plain in central Turkey. This is where some of the first traces of villages were found, dating back to 7400 B.C.E, this was considered early in the Neolithic period. This village consisted of many mud brick structures with walls, floors, and ceilings covered in plaster. This specific location is important because it shows the use of early architecture and exceptional art. After excavations we have concluded that these structures were more than just shelters they also served as shrines and graves. The paintings on the interior walls of these structures were much more in depth and wild than cave paintings from the Paleolithic period. (Art History, pg.14) Were the Neolithic people’s imaginations getting more creative or were their daily interactions becoming wilder? This was the first question that ran through my mind. Violent, wild scenes of humans without heads, huge horned wild animals and dangerous interactions between the two cover the walls of these structures. Some excavators see these paintings as a depiction of games, hunting, rituals or taunting of these animals. Animals were the sources of food, clothing and tools; every part of the animal was used that is why they are so consistence in prehistoric art. Along with the importance of animals was the important of the male. Some paintings show bearded men and erect animals. (Art History, pg. 14)

"Animal Hunt" restoration of main room in shrine

“Critically, the mixture of shelter, architecture, art, spirit, ritual, and ceremony at these and many other Neolithic sites makes us realize that we cannot easily distinguish between “domesticated” and “sacred” architecture.” (Art History, pg.15)

Seated female figure of fertility Çatalhöyük 6000 BCE

To be honest I am not sure what to think about the Neolithic and even Paleolithic cave painting, carvings, and ceramics for that matter. I can only assume that they were created for many reasons not just one. How many things in life solely happen for one reason? Not many. Their art could be for teaching hunting or rituals, recording events, spiritual expression, personal expression, or decoration. Whether I am right or wrong I think the reason for their art is a combination of everything. In the modern world today, we shouldn’t use our knowledge and discoveries to nitpick, point the finger at right and wrong or get carried away with crazy theories. Let us use common sense for once. We will never be able to go back thousands of years to live with and get into the minds of these people. The best thing we can do is search for more evidence, find relationships between them and us and appreciate the fascinating pieces of history they left behind. Whether our perception of their reality is their actually reality, we may never know, we must learn to accept that.

Art History Essay

2011-09-23T18:34:00.000-07:00

Lascaux, France - cave paintings- link to cite

Essay #1a – Them and Us

QUESTION: How artistically similar, or different, do you think prehistoric people were compared to modern man and what singular force or need continues to drive the artistic needs and human expressions of the 21st century?

Part 1:

Summary: I chose to answer this question because I think art is so important to the individual even since the beginning of civilization. Whether art is used for utilitarian purposes or self expression, its importance to man will live on. I knew I wanted to express this in my essay so I began thinking how I could support my opinion on how artistically similar prehistoric and modern people are.

Reason: The reason I think this question was asked is because in a nutshell this question is why we study the history of art. We want to know why we have a natural drive in us to want to create beautiful, subjective images. By studying art from the beginning of civilization we can better understand and realize art has been in our blood for thousands of years.

Purpose: The purpose of asking this question was to stimulate thought, and to make the connection between prehistoric and modern people, artistically. Also to look into our text and other sources to back up our opinions, in hopes of finding something interesting and learning something new!

Direction: I wanted to show that prehistoric and modern people are artistically similar and that there is a singular force that drives our artistic needs. To be honest I first began with myself before opening my text book. I began pondering my artistic needs and how they are similar or different from prehistoric people and the time gap in between from what I have learned so far. I personally think the answer to a lot of questions lies within us we just have to be stimulated to look inside our minds. Then I opened my text book, which was very helpful, and began to construct my answer.

Impressions: My favorite part of my research was when I stumbled upon a comparative theories essay by Carlisle Bergquist. The opening quote was "Creativity is the step child of psychology". (Bergquist) I found that humorous but true. The reading was very interesting and helped me answer the second sentence in this question.

Part 2: The Answer:

As much as prehistoric people are different from modern people, they are more similar artistically than we realize. Yes, living in a cave or in a clay dwelling during the first civilizations in Europe is worlds different than how humans live today. The amount we have evolved is so tremendous most people assume we as humans and our desires are not comparable, but they are. The need for harmony, love, stability, knowledge, reproduction, nutrition, etc has remained the same since the beginning of time. Art, like humans, has evolved. Though the tools and mediums of art we use today are different then prehistoric times, the purpose of art remains almost identical.

The most obvious difference of prehistoric art and modern day art expression is also the most hidden similarity, in my opinion. What we recognize today as “art” in prehistoric times started off mainly as a utilitarian way of expressing necessary things like hunting.

The more well known works of prehistoric people are found in caves in central and southern France and northern Spain. The Chauvet cave, near Vallon-Pont-d’ Arc in southern France, is the earliest known site of prehistoric cave paintings. These dramatic cave paintings included vital animals like horses, bison, bears, mammoths, deer, owls, etc. As well as handprints, humans, grids, circle and dots. Also the most well known cave art, in Lascaux, had about 600 painting and 1,500 engravings with more detail and emphasis on animal characteristics. (Stokstad and Cothren)

So prehistoric art being seen more for utilitarian purposes than a form of expression is a lot different than art we see today right? Not really. Although the cave painting are beautiful and complex for that time, modern people still use art and imagery in a utilitarian way. Sight being one of the five senses makes humans very visual creatures. Road signs, billboards, and other instructional images may not be seen as beautiful works of art but they do serve a similar purpose. Have you ever read a cook book with a lot of images showing you what to do and how the ingredients should look throughout the cooking process? This is similar to cave painting that show how to hunt bison or deer.

Link

As for the force or need we still have in the 21st century to express ourselves artistically it all comes down to self actualization and the psychological aspect that produces the desire to create something aesthetically pleasing. For me personally my niche is photography. Using a technical device to capture images how I see them, then using my own style to manipulate photos to create an image that makes you look deeper. I also have began to explore drawing the human body and painting. To me art is therapeutic, interesting, challenging, relaxing, and mysterious all at the same time. When a person can express themselves artistically, they are seeing the world around them in a new light, and for some maybe that is the only way they can digest the world around them. Even though the prehistoric people may not have realized or grasped this idea of artistic expression, I believe it was still a natural instinct they had; thus producing some of the world most beautiful painting by chewing fat and pigment and spitting it out onto a cave wall.

"My feeling is that the concept of creativeness and the concept of the healthy, self-actualizing, fully-human person seem to be coming closer and closer together, and may perhaps turn out to be the same thing. (Maslow, 1963)
The above quotation shows the esteem with which humanistic psychologists view human nature. There are many individual theories within the field but the human capacity for growth is central in all of them. Creativity is essential to growth as the individual learns, and adapts to his environment and to an inner sense of values. As Maslow's statement indicates, this is part of being a healthy human being. Viewing human nature as a conscious, self-directed, self-actualizing, healthy process distinguishes humanistic psychology from psychoanalytic and behavioristic psychology. These latter psychologies see humankind and creativity in terms of base instincts and conditioned responses respectively. They see creativity as a way of compensating for areas otherwise lacking in the personality (Alfred Adler, 1956, cited by May, 1975, & Frager, Fadiman, 1984). Humanistic psychology brings a wholeness to the human being and the creativity process. Creativity infuses all of life." (Bergquist)

Link

The best thing about art is how universal and personal it can be at the same time. Art is what you want it to be and it is why we are who we are today as the human race. If the prehistoric people never painted on the caves or began to used clay and stone to create sculptures, where would we be today? Yes we are artistically similar, we have mainly learn,grown an evolved from our discoveries. Hopefully we will continue to evolve and never lose the desire to create.