Studying Help

I made these to help test my memory with the slides. Thought they might be useful for the rest of you guys. :)

Lecture 1 & 2:
http://bighugelabs.com/flickr/slideshow.php?id=38188

Lecture 3 & 4:
http://bighugelabs.com/flickr/slideshow.php?id=38189

Lecture 5:
http://bighugelabs.com/flickr/slideshow.php?id=38191

-Jess

People who get other people to make their work for them

The Red Hot Chili Peppers made this awesome video using work from an Autrian artist named Erwin Wurm, he makes "one-minute sculptures" but he gets other people to do it for him. Try to think of how democratic and interactive it is, and how it is still very definately Wurm's work.

Review Night on Thursday the 18th

We are going to meet at CSB room 206 at 7:30 pm, and we will review till whenever...

Some questions:

1) Describe the roles that phenomenology and constructivism had in the development and production of minimalist art, in particular the works of Donald Judd, Robert Morris, Dan Flavin, Carl Andre and Frank Stella.

2) Discuss the roles of consumerism, capitalism, pop culture and the historical avant-garde in relationship to Pop Art, give examples of artists who employ these ideas in their work.

3) German art was changed dramatically by World War II, discuss the artists associated with 'Capitalist-Realism' and the work of Joseph Beuys, think of the art works they produced in relationship to their identities as Germans after the Holocaust and WWII.

4) Discuss some of the main issues raised and worked on by the Abstract Expressionists, where were they painting, what were they painiting and from what pools were they drawing inspiration from?

5) Think of the idea of the gestalt, what artists, or works of art seem to embody the idea that the whole is more than the sum of it's parts, give names and examples.

6) Describe the influence of Marcel Duchamp on two artists we have discussed, compare the similarities and differences these artists used in developing work after Duchamp, that was inspired by his aesthetic philosophy.

7) Scatology has been a major point of interest, in all of our readings, discuss the role of scatology in our readings about European painting and Abstract Expressionism, name two artists who incorporate the idea of scatology into their painting technique, discuss their aesthetic reasons for doing so.

8) What role has semiotics, or the study of signs played in our readings related to sculpture and painting? Give at least one example.

Midterm Study Guide 1

Alright, you are all going to talk about several of the issues we have been covering. If you haven't noticed, I am not totally convinced that being able to define a term or an idea is the same as being able to talk about it, since definitions are treacherous. So be familiar with things, definitions appear when topics are discussed, so start discussing these things with each other as study sxcercises.

Study topics:

1) semiotics (the study of signs), in relation to Abstract Expressionism, Pop art, minimalism...but think of it mostly in relation to the gargantuan notion of "art":
think of the basics in semiotics: the signifier and the signifier, language(texts, spoken words), image (pictures, paintings, advertising), cultural signs (stop signs, the American flag, etc.)

2) constructivism , in art, familiarize yourself with 'the October Revolution, Suprematism, Malevich, Rodchenko, Tatlin, think of artists as 'workers'.
Constructivism as a development coming out of Russian Futurism. Futurism and Cubism were art movements that were developing more or less simultaneously during 1908-1919. 1919 is the year that constructivism was more or less in full effect. Constructivism was not known in the US, until the cold war was well under way: 1950s. Constructivism represented an alternative to the historical avant-garde than cubism or futurism (which was equated with fascism). Think of Flavin's "Monuments to Tatlin'

3) gestalt "the whole is more than the sum of its parts"

4) ontology (the study of being)

5) phenomenology (just for your thoughts, phenomenolgy has 3 definitions before it becomes very important to art with the publication of The Phenomenology of Perception by Maurice Merleau-Ponty:

a) Hegel says phenomenology is the a philosophical approach to consciousness which begins with the expoloration of phenomena, also called 'dialectical'.

b) Husserl defines phenomenology essentially, that is he studies the essence of phenomenological ontology from the first-person point of view, based on intuitive experience, also called 'transcendental'.

c) Heidegger applies a more structured approach, with object/subject of experience, focusing phenomenology on the 'experience of being' called 'ontological'.

6)The Phenomenology of Perception: of note in this text is that he sees two modes of expression: 1) the spoken language, that is language we speak, what he calls 'secondary expression'. 2) speaking language, that is language that actively engages our perception (senses, emotion, etc.), or 'primary expression'. These are weird I know, but will begin to make sense after spending time with them. Just know that he doesn't define 'art', but talks about it as a 'primary expression', or a speaking language, and discusses how art doesn't have to be in service to beauty, etc., and the Minimalists took to these ideas very intensely.

7) Capitalist-Realism in reference to Socialist-Realism, or even Fascist-Realism, also called the Art of the Third Reich (also called 'Romantic-Realism or Heroic-Realism, depending on who was writing the art history books), think Sigmar Polke and Gerhard Richter, then think of how this idea relates to the Independent Group and to Pop Art when it emerges in the U.S.

8) Avant-Garde and Kitsch: know the differences between the avant-garde, the historical avant-garde, kitsch, camp, popular taste, populism. Know who Clement Greenberg is, and what his relationship to the Abstract Expressionist was, and then his relationship to Abstract Painting after Ab Ex.

9) Marcel Duchamp, know readymades and his influence on many generations of artists.

10) structuralism, think of semiotics again, structuralism draws the world into binaries, they think of metanarratives, Claude Levi-Strauss and bricolage.

11) scatology poo and aesthetics

Minimalism

HELLO!
In the 1957b reading we learned that artist such as Reinhardt imposed the idea that his work was "...the last painting which anyone can make" that every painting was the "ultimate" work of its kind. What is it that triggered that idea. Why is every one of his painting that last one of a progressive series?

In the 1958 reading "A constant negation of impulses" artist Jasper Johns opposes the idea that abstract art needs to be only of forms and colors and not recognizable objects. Johns starts his own type of Abstract Impressionism by recourse to everyday cultural signs. Do you really think that his piece Flag was a abstract painting or just a painting of a flag.

And finally...just another extra question :D
Is architecture and three-dimensional art completely opposites? As LeWitt insited....?

See you all later!
Angela R.

class discussion questions

1) Were "new disfiguration" modifications modeled after common graffiti? If it does, is it a mochary or a compliment of graffiti?

2) Robert Morris reinforced his realism using several strategies. I want to know how he was able to do so, did someone ask him to incorprate more realism into his work or did he feel inspired to do so.

Outside Readings, for Everyone

Hello young witches and wizards,


Here are some outside readings for extra help in digging through many of the issues we have been discussing so far.
They will help to inform the essays you are going to be writing for the midterm. And all links into "Project Gutenberg", read the text as html, it will work a bit better...

So, two kind of dark and negative categories:

1) Scat and the Anti-Tradition
2) Dark Vision (because it themes well in our class)



Scatology and the Anti-Tradition: Or what I call, a few lines from the Noble and Sophisticated History of Fart Jokes:

We talked about the antitradition and scatology, here is a link to Project Gutenberg:
Francois Rabelais, "Gargantua and Pantagruel, Book I, Chapter 1.XIII.—"How Gargantua's wonderful understanding became known to his father Grangousier, by the invention of a torchecul or wipebreech".(they didn't translate torchecul, which translates as 'Asswipe')

Jean Baudrillard, 'Pataphysics


Dark Vision: Society, Spectacle, Prison, Panopticon and Cutting up Men


Guy Debord, "The Society of the Spectacle"(This book is long, but worth while to know, since the Situationist International keeps coming up in the readings, thumb through it and get to know the language and how he uses it to discuss art and politics)


Michel Foucault, "Panopticism", from "Discipline and Punish"(this article is exceptionally important for us today, isn't it?)


Valerie Solanas, "The SCUM Manifesto"(She is the one who shot Andy Warhol and SCUM is her art collective, the Society for Cutting Up Men)

Fight the dark side my paduan 'pataphysicians!

Black Marriage

Ad Reinhardt was known for his "black paintings" which he felt was art. However, art should move the viewer in a negative or even positive way but how can one be moved by the absence of a message in a paintings or work which conveys what seems to be of nothingness?

Seminar Topics for 10/9/07 Blog by Mayissa Susanna

Dear Fellow Artists in Seminar:
I have been fighting to preserve the artist's hand for ever so long through my own work and have been most fortunate to enjoy both the tutelage and support of the incomparable and unforgettable Professor Paul Bruner with respect to same. Nonetheless, I actually enjoy delving into the works of minimalists, the likes of which would most definitely include Robert Morris as I feel they fall on the complete opposite end of my spectrum. There is a presence surrounding works like his Three L-Beams which neither begins with or ends with the exaggerated scale involved. So, I don't wholly agree with the notion of exorcising the demons, seen as the last remnants of aura from an object. I believe we end up right back where we started from and find ourselves replacing one type of unique aura with another for our efforts. It is not difficult to appreciate the concept of obliterating the original, but that's about where it realistically ends for me. This should make for an interesting continuing class discussion. The industrial sheen and precision in measurement with absolute replication of miniscule detailing -- sums up quite a bit of our own world to date. There is a dastardly side to capitalism which far too many people are either unable or refuse to recognize, especially when it invades the art arena. So, I guess I'll keep painting WITH THE ARTIST'S HAND in order to preserve it -- this legal career switch was never about making money in the first place. It was about the love of art. Happy Night to All! Mayissa Susanna

Less is More (Minimalism)

1. Minimalism is defined as "work that is stripped down to its most fundamental features". In the first section of reading (1957c) we read about three minimalists. How do Ad Reinhardt, Agnes Martin, and Robert Ryman each tackle the concept of minimalism? Which artist is the most successful? The least? And how do the materials used change the piece?

2. In the 1965 chapter, we read about Donald Judd and Robert Morris. These artists share similar views when it comes to sculptural minimalism. Explain why Judd sought to reduce his works to a "unitary shape". Also, how does this relate to Morris's idea that minimalism "takes relationships out of the work"? What is the new meaning behind this kind of art, according to these artists?

See you all on Thursday. =)

-Jess

Minimalism and it's Malcontents

My dear witches and wizards, sorcerers and sorceresses, necromancers and limiinal beings,

This week we read through the rivers of 'Minimalism' (or reductivism or literalism, depending on what slur one wants to throw about). Minimalism is one of those bizarre art movements that sets its own standard, but the text that is almost always and consistently thrown around during a discussion of minimalism is 'Art and Objecthood" written by Michael Fried. Fried does not like minimalism, and it is interesting to note that basically the seminal text on minimalism is a complete bash of it.

Minimalism is grounded in some topics we have been going over:

1) phenomenology
2) constructivism
3) gestalt
4) industrial materials
5) the gesamtkunstwerk (a total work of art), think of this idea in relation to the notion of a gestalt of the gestalt...

In the packet readings, Stella and Judd discuss these topics in length and place themselves within those contexts. Notice the malcontent they have for Ab Ex painting and lyrical abstraction (tachisme) in general. There is a malaise in relaion to almost all other forms of art...except Pop art. They hold Oldenberg in next to the highest regard possible.

We talked last week about where postmodernism starts. This is a good a place as any and one worth pausing on to address as the start of 'postmodernism'. Remember 'postmodernism' and 'poststructuralism', are not really terms a postmodernist/ poststructuralist artist would use, because they tend to not define things in such structural or modernist ways.

Topics to think about:

1) the minimalists are the first true generation of artists to earn MFA degrees.
2) distinguishing between different genres after minimalism will becme hard, because many of these artists exist in several different camps: robert morris (minimalism, concept art), robert smithson (minimalism, concept art, earth art, site-specific work), etc...
3) the death of the author, which I have posted in the blog post "Outside Readings", note the end of the text, on how the death of the author means the birth of the reader...think back to our discussion of "who/what/how is the/an audience?"
4) what constitutes a 'good' work of art?
5) "the anxiety of influence"
6) look at the essays from the Artforums around the time 'Art and Objecthood' was published (about 1966-67): Robert Smithson, "Towards the Development of an Air Terminal Site"; Sol LeWitt, "Paragraphs on Conceptual Art"; Robert Morris, "Notes on Sculpture"

As a side note here, and to end, Michael Fried went to the ropes saying that minimalism and conceptualism sucked. The other writers at Artforum left and founded a periodical named October (members of which wrote this text), and after a few years of having theoretical debates with Smithson and Judd, Michael Fried hung up his boxing gloves and left the contemporary art arena to apply his phenomenological hermeneutics to 19th century art.

Perhaps it was the 'dark mark'.

Whacky for Warhol

First I must say that Andy Warhol is a most wonderfully weird character and I am absolutely fascinated by him. So sorry if I focus on him quite a bit. Secondly, I'm rushing to class within the next few minutes so, I'll try to cram in as much as I can. Here it goes:

1) Consider Warhol's "factory" appraoch to art. He reproduced images over and over again. For example his work about Marilyn Monroe, her face is repeated over and over again, reinforcing the fact that she was seen as a "product", something produced by the factory known as Hollywood. How do you think this depicts his views on Hollywood? Is he trying to send a message that the industry is ludacrous in how it manufactures and profits from these individuals? Or is it really just simply art? Do we sometimes read too much into things, and maybe that's what Warhol is pointing out? Ok now I'm really digging....

2) Also, he had said something along the lines of looking at a piece of work over and over again forces you to see it differently, and furthermore to think less of it and feel less about it. Do you think that's true? Do you think feeling nothing about a piece of work thus belies the fact that it is art?

3) Assuming at least some people read about McLuhan's work, how do you feel that McLuhan and Warhol are related on their views about art, pop culture, and society? Do you see a connection?

That's about it. See you soon.

ummm

im still kinda confused about this question thing. can we ask anything we want or does it have to be about the reading, and if so , when were we assigned reading?

anyway i think this is my week so here are my question for everyone to think about

1. what makes popart pop

pop art.

Sorry this is a little late.... :/

When I was reading (1956) I found it interesting how some artists such as Richard Hamilton poked fun at the postwar consumer culture. I found it extremely interesting how in his collage, "Just what is it that makes today's homes so different, so appealing?" he integrated so many ad-slogans and even a Ford emblem. Well....I guess my question would be what effect does the consumer culture have on pop art? Is this effect positive or negative?

OK, next question....

What is your view of POP art vs. modernist paintings? According to Lichtenstein, Pop is not so different from a modern painting because "they project a similar sort of viewer, one that is all eye, that takes in the image in a flash, in a 'Pop' of immediacy." So...are they similar? Why or why not?

P.S. Bri Bri, you are a character. Just putting that out there :]

POPart!

to my fellow witches and wizards,

we have arrived at the long awaited pop art chapter. i can honestly say that this was the most enjoyable chapter for me so far, oh yes. anywhoo, lets get down to business. before i post my questions, i want to provide some random sidenotes that will help you with the reading.

-be able to compare and contrast modernism and post-modernism. where do they overlap and where do they emerge as diverge?
-be familiar with terms like consumer capitalism, situationalist international, and the takeover of minimalism and pop art and the slow falling out of abstract expressionism.

ok, so here are questions that i found most interesting to discuss:

1.) After reading the chapter on the political stance of art with situationalists (1957A), do you agree with the concept of capital realism? Do we really need eachother and our environment to progress our art, or is art a separate working entity, and should be untouched or undisturbed by outside factors?

2.) A common theme that POPPED up a lot (muahah) was painting. I noticed a trend after Frank Stella said, "There are two problems in painting, one is to find out what painting is and the other is to find out how to make a painting." Then in the John Cage reading, it was said that "Painting relates to both art and life. Neither can be made." Towards the end of the reading, it was said that "If you do not change your mind about something when you confront a picture you have not seen before, you are either a stubborn fool or the painting is not very good." With all these references to painting, use any of these quotes or your personal experience with painting to provide your own definition of painting.

3.) BONUSSS!! I had to. OK, After reading up on Andy Warhol, has your opinion changed about his execution, style, and overall persona, or do you see him in a different light after the disillusionment of the hype and notority wore off? Do you see his art more as entertaining and playful or how he wanted it to be perceived, where he said "The more you look at the same exact thing, the more the meaning goes away, and the better and emptier you feel."

OK, i'm off to potions class, i mean artmaking. then quidditch practice till 6.

SHOUTOUT to mich-mich and tiffer biffer. <33
and dont forget, professor shafier is the greatest wizard alive!!

1.) One thing that was interesting to me as I read John Cage (1912-1992) 'On Robert Rauschenberg, Artist, and his Work' was how after discussing how he makes art, he slightly changes subjects and says: "art is the imitation of nature in her manner of operation." I got to thinking about what that really meant and if that stood true. Everything that is on this earth is game for inspiration of art and everything that makes up the world comes from a natural source which is in operation. Do you think that this statement stands true? Is art the imitation of nature in her manner of operation?

2.) A second thing that was worth mentioning came as I was reading Jasper Johns interview with David Sylvester. The part of the conversation where they are talking about the purpose of making art. John Jasper says: " I don't think it's a purposeful thing to make something to be looked at, but i think the perception of the object [artwork] is through looking and through thinking. And I think any meaning we give to it comes through our looking at it." To me, this is an interesting concept that art shouldn't be made to look at, but we need to look at it in order to think about it give it meaning. What would be your take on this comment by John Jasper?



Chris Rypkema

Pop Art

Our readings this week went through the development of what would become universally dubbed 'pop art'. We also had a re-reading of the Situationist chapter.

The main concept to be aware of for pop art in these contexts is simulacra:

the copy without an original.


Things to look up:

1) constructivism
2) retro-futurism
3) take another look at 'capital realism' in relation to the german artists Polke, Richter and Baselitz.
4) populism
5) the role of an 'audience', we talked last week about 'what is art?', 'what is sculpture?', blah blah blah, whatever...
think about this, 'who is the audience?', 'who was this made for?', or 'is this for everyone, forever in all places?' thiink about the idea that art is universal, that it's role and appeal actually can, should or be forever...is good work good work forever? Duchamp claimed that the function of museums was to house all of our mediocre things. Think about that in relation to his Etant Donnes, the famous secret 'final piece' he made.

A duality to consider, in a 'structuralist' mode, remember that structuralism uses binaries to describe things and theories:

1) handmade/readymade

This will go back to our question of what is a sculpture. Look at Rauschenberg and Johns, and the way they integrate the handmade and the readymade.

If you did some of the outside readings, ask yourself these questions in relation to Pop art.

what is camp?
what is kitsch?
what is pop?
what is populist?

Everything becomes an issue of taste, and we are constantly referring back to Duchamp and his fart jokes.

My dear little witches and wizards, will this elongated fart joke ever get old?

Yours,

Nathan Shafier (Shafier is my magician name, like David Blaine)


As extra credit, if anyone is interested. A great writer, who is not being discussed with these texts is Marshall McLuhan:

be ready to talk about 'The Mechanical Bride', 'The Gutenberg Galaxy' and 'The Medium is the Message'.