Art & Audience

When artists make art about a particular issue (such as war or immigration) what difference are they making? In what way are they helping the situation? Should they try to be a part of the solution and make a practical contribution? Why should art be made about these issues? In what way is the situation being helped?



What is the difference between an artist that is helping a community and a social worker or non-profit organization? At what point is it art? At what point is it social work? Does there need to be a distinction?

What is the unique roll of the artist. . . What can artists contribute that social workers or non-profits aren’t already doing?



How is authorship effected when the audience is involved in creating the work?



When the limits and direction are still created by the artist, is it truly the participant/audience that make up the work? or are the participants given the illusion of control while being in a loose cage created by the artist?



How does this lack of control or orchestration on the part of the artist effect the visual format?



When the work leaves the artist hand and becomes a part of the community is it still art?

How is it art? What makes it art?



What is an appropriate setting for work that is relationally based in which a material object is not produced? Are the established art institutions appropriate? How does a work that is socially focused change when placed in a gallery and a museum? Is it still valuable or interesting in this setting?



Does the recording of the interaction take away from the sincerity and genuine nature of the piece?



What are the reasons that people give away their work to the viewers?  

Why do artists use this strategy? How effective is it?

Should artists be giving things away? Why or why not? What problems/issues does it create when artists give things away?



How do these types of artists survive? Is it wrong to make a living with your art?



What are some of the issues/challenges of making art that involves people?

Appropriateness, in what cases are artists using people?

How does artists gain the trust of people?

Art and Institution

1. What are some examples of institutional critiques that seem hypocritical?

2. What art is separated from the institution?

3. 

Art and Globalism

1. Why is there so much interest on globalism right now?

2. Is America the only country "fearing" the globalist trend?

3. What is the difference between globalism and globalisation?

4. After all the doors are opened, would we really become a homogenous culture?

5. Is it western arts standards and values that are taking over the international art scene? or is it just the western art's language that everyone else started using?

Art and Identity

1. Is there any art that says nothing about the identity of the artist?

2. What are some reasons for using identity for the subject of art?

Art and the Quotidian Object

Choi Jeong Hwa

Choi Jeong Hwa

Art + Abstraction

Armory Review

Armory 2010 Review

Jaeman Shin

 

                Walking through the crowded isles with absolute visual overload of colors, lights, and sound, my first reactionary thought was that this is not how art should be shown or viewed.  I am aware that the main purpose of the Armory show is the buying and selling of the art, yet the carpet flooring and the cubicle divided galleries take away a lot from the true experience of the artworks.  There were many great artworks at the show yet most of the times my eyes were so numb from the massive scale of the exhibition, I found my eyes spending the most time on “loud” attention grabbing artworks of big scale, bright lights, or illusionary aspects.  And these eye grabbing artworks just may be the current trend in the world wide art market since I saw plenty of them at the Armory show 2010. Trying to make a connection between the current artworks by meaning, method, or aesthetics is an extremely difficult if not impossible task with the artworks seeming to come from random points in modern to post-modern art. 

Hyper realistic artworks were popular among many galleries. Out of all the massive hyper-realistic paintings at the Armory, Deborah Poynton’s nude female and male paintings were very powerful and felt new and different from many other hyper-realistic figure paintings that I have seen before.  Among the many different subject matters excruciatingly rendered on gigantic canvases, There was also a creepy hyper-realistic sleepwalking life size sculpture by Tony Matelli. Similar to last year’s Armory show, series of mirrored neon light sculptures and neon text were everywhere. The one that stays on my mind is Bert Rodriguez’s play on Bruce Nauman’s Sculpture which reads “The true artist makes shit for rich people to buy.”

Some of the many other “genres” of art at the armory show were pop art reminiscent works like the yellow room installation I Am Curious Yellow by Adam McEwin, Interactive art like spray to forget , body painted lady performance,and political works like the tar covered scrooge and the live cam 360 degree view of an oil pump. 

My favorite artworks were the kinetic sculptures especially the incredibly simple yet beautiful sculpture serpentine by Zilvinas Kempinas. Zilvinas uses weighted magnetic tapes floating and twirling in the corner of the cubicle by a couple of fans. The magnetic tapes resemble sea snakes or eels diving deep under water and felt so alive I must have stared at this artwork for at least ten minutes, which is a very long time to spend on one artwork at the armory. Elias Crespin’s Tetralineados circular was a very well crafted and subtle yet powerful artwork made with multi-colored plexi-glass squares suspended in a ring shape formation slowly moving in waves. The suspended sculpture felt like a mixture of Donald Judd and Olafur Eliasson. Conrad Shawcross’s Pre-Retroscope VI, a boat like structure with paddles and a projector and screen running on a circular track on top was a very nice artwork, and a perfect example for the physical projection project in the new media course. 

One of the most enjoyable aspects of the Armory show was seeing big name artists from cubicle to cubicle, and many times the works were less known and slightly different from the works the artists were known for.  Olafur Eliasson showed his photographs and Rhomboid Kaleidoscope, and it was exciting to see a completely different type of work from an artist that I really like. Sarah Sze known for her huge installations but she had a small windex lamp and table sculpture which was positioned in an awkward spot easily passed by unnoticed for many viewers. The Armory show’s convention/mall type setup makes it almost impossible for installation artists like Olafur Eliasson and Sarah Sze to show their works, besides it would be pointless since installations are not really sellable artworks.

A noticeable amount of “magic eye” like illusionary sculptures and paintings/wall mounted works could be seen again and again throughout the piers. These illusionary effects were achieved using a wide variety of rather new technologies like the live interactive video work by Lozano-Hemmer Rafael. Rafael’s The company of colours is a flat panel screen which converts the viewers in front of it into color sample panels like what you see on a photoshop type software or at the paint store. Also, L.E.D.s, laser cut paper or plexi-glass, and even holographs were used to create the visual illusions. 

Much like the wide variety of different cultures interacting in the globalized world today, the world-wide trend in art is also a mix of all different types of art. This could be viewed as complete freedom to do anything or complete confusion with no direction. I am not sure which of the two describes the art of now, maybe both.

                Walking out of the Armory show exhausted, I felt a little bad for the many artworks that were just buried by too much artwork. I know many hours and hard work were put into a lot of the works that I didn’t even glance at for more than five seconds. 

Whitney Review

Whitney Biennial 2010 Review

Jaeman Shin

 

From hearing negative review after negative review from people who have gone to the Whitney Biennial, I had to work very hard not to walk through the exhibition with a biased mind. Also, the incredibly strict “guards” at the Whitney did not help to make the viewing experience pleasant.  Looking at the Whitney Biennial as a whole, I don’t really see any theme or clear connection between the artworks. If I had to pick a theme that may fit these works, it would probably be “un-monumental” like the book I am reading for professor Bradford’s sculpture course. But there are definitely quite a few artworks that don’t really fit into the “un-monumental” theme. Many if not all of the sculptural and installation works were un-monumental yet, photographic works like the Burnt Afghan Women and many of the video arts do not seem to work with that theme.  There is also a political theme of America and it’s current state, like the ambulance We like America and America likes us or the president Obama newspaper couch by Jessica Jackson Hutchins. Nina Berman’s photo series of former marine Ty Ziegel are powerful and successful examples of this theme. If there were just a few more politically inspired artworks in the show, the theme could be America, but this theme is distracted by pockets of un-monumental or abstract-expressionist type artworks.

                One of my favorite from this exhibition was Kerry Tribe’s video projection H.M. The documentary style dual projection was about an old man who lost his short-term memory when he was in his forties. I believe he was an epilepsy patient who had an experimental brain surgery which resulted in him losing his short term memory because of the doctor’s mistake. If I remember correctly, while filming this old man, Kerry Tribe realizes that her neighbor was the doctor who performed the surgery on the man she was filming. There were many video works in this exhibition, most of them were dance choreography and home video style artworks which I couldn’t really understand or appreciate.

                In the photographic art area, two artworks stand out from the rest in my mind. Nina Berman’s marine photos and Stephanie Sinclair’s Afghan women. While both work deals with tragedy and renewal / recovery, I found Nina Berman’s photographs more successful because Stephanie Sinclair’s burn victims felt too graphic for unnecessary reasons and comes off as going for the shock value. This negative response to Stephanie Sinclair’s work may also have something to do with the installation artwork strange attractors that I had to walk through right before viewing Sinclair’s work. I think if there is an art work dealing with darker and serious subject matters, they should be presented in a well thought out point in the viewer’s flow through the exhibition. The strange attractors was a weird and funny looking installation with handheld video cameras in stockings hanging from the ceiling. I do not have a clue on what the installation is about but I don’t think it is the appropriate artwork to be right next to Sinclair’s photographs.

                I felt many of the sculptural works were of poor craftsmanship and weak at both conceptual and aesthetic levels. Theaster Gates installation sculptures on the bottom floor was probably the best sculptural work in the show. The wine rack looking metal sculpture on the second or third floor was one of the worst welding job that I have seen, and the two two-by-fours screwed together sitting on a pedestal was too much in my opinion and it makes me feel slightly sick to think about what the artist would have had to make up for in words to get that artwork into a show of this caliber.

                Although it was refreshing in a way to see new works from many artists that I have never heard of, the feel like the overall show was unsuccessful. There were some good artworks in the exhibition yet many if not most of the artworks were mediocre at best. After thinking through the exhibition once again while writing this review, I still think the theme is either America or un-monumental art. But, it feels like the theme that fits this biennial the best would be “randomness”

               

               

               

Art Nature and Technology, Questions + Images

Mark Dion

Mel Chin , Revival Field

1. What are some ways to use nature but not be about nature?

2. What is the difference between science and art?

3. Are things from nature readymades?

4. 

Manifesto

Radicant images + notes

michel majerus


Heri Dono


Kim Sooja


Bertrand Lavier


Sylvie Fleury

Radicant Images

Shirin Nashat


Kutlug Ataman - Kuba


Laszlo Moholy-Nagy


Julie Mehretu


Darren Almond

Mike Kelly

Radicant Notes and Questions

Q: Is the economic globalization really making us into a homogenous culture?

Q: Is globalization a natural evolutionary result that has been happening throughout history but just recently happening at a much greater scale? If it is, should we even be thinking about how we should change or adapt to this new world? or would the answers come naturally like just like the event?

Q: "non-western artists as guests to be treated with politeness, not full fledged actors on the cultural scene in their own right" Is this wrong? when at non-western regions the western artists will be treated with politeness and so on.

Q: Is the cultural origin "root" really nothing more than a phantom limb after amputation in this modern globalized world?

Q: What are some major problems that can occur from the world embracing Tabula Rasa?

Post-Production notes + Questions

Notes

*What is Art in today's terms? Is the term "Art" too far away from the original meaning making the term out-dated and not applicable?

*When the consumer or the viewer makes the art, does the artist even need to know what he/she is creating? Or is just the question enough to make the artist the artist?

*If the "question" is enough to make the artist "the artist", are the viewer's also "the artist" by coming up with "answers"?

*With the artists becoming re-interpretors, appropriators, experimenters, social commentators, philosopher, etc, is there still a place for the artist the creator of "original" things? now? in near future?

*Is it no longer possible to create anything "original"? in the actual meaning of the word?

Post-Production artist images

Daniel Pflumm


Wang Du Strategie en chambre, 1999


Matthieu Laurette


Dominique Gonzalez-Foerster


Haim Steinbach


Jason Rhoades


Liam Gillick Övningskörning (Driving Practice), 2004


Rikrit Tiravanija


Bertrand Lavier

Anton Vidokle Images

Helio Oiticica

Grand Nucleus

Nocagions

Invention of Colour 

Benjamin Walter notes and questions

a) What is the "Aura" of a work of art?

The "uniqueness" or "authenticity" that many people feel is necessary in a artwork. It is the magical or mysterious quality that maintained a distance between the art and it's creator to the viewers. According  to Walter Benjamin, mechanical reproduction made the "aura" wither away.

b)In Benjamin's mind, what effects did mechanical reproduction, such as film and the camera/photography, have on the viewer's perception of art?

With photography and film, art no longer had to look at the world in retrospect. The almost instant and real quality of camera and film made the art move at the speed of speech. It also brought the public closer to art, since it was more easy to understand in process and final product.

c)What is meant by the passage:"for the first time in world history, mechanical reproduction emancipates the work of art from its parasitical dependence on ritual."

Due to mechanical reproduction and artwork being created for reproduction like the slide image where the idea of "original" doesn't make sense, the "aura" no longer had to exist on a artwork. You no longer have to be "qualified" to make art, anyone with a camera could easily approach and experiment with any type of art they pleased. 

d)What mechanically or otherwise reproductive processes are changing the face of art today?

rapid prototyping (3D printer)  and 3D softwares, video or image editing softwares (Photoshop, Flash, Final Cut) and the internet. Youtube, blogs and wysiwyg web design softwares like Dreamweaver are making reproduced and original artworks visible to anyone around the world. Also, many hardwares that were previously too expensive for individual owners are quickly becoming more and more affordable. 

Art and Today Introduction notes

Define the art of this time 2010

What name would you give it?

I think Bouriaud's Alter-Modern works. Or Ultra-modern?

When did it begin? How did it begin?

With the advancement in satellite technology and more importantly the global spread of the Internet. Also caused by major events in the world such as the financial crisis, environmental crisis, oil crisis.

What are the main principles associated with this Movement?

Influenced by Modern art, Post-modern art, and all the different movements in between, also affected by the current state of the financial and environmental world. I think it is a time of confusion. Artists living now are looking into the history of art and the future of this planet to find where art stands in this ultra-modern world. All of the previous art movements were during times when humanity was in an upward trajectory, not knowing the damage it was doing to itself. But, now humanity is almost at a crisis point where the path will start (or already started) heading downward if something isn't done.

Who are the main artists/critics associated with it and what is the aesthetic character of the Art of today?

Any active artist today. I think the aesthetic characteristic is that it has no aesthetic characteristic.

Define Post-Modern Art

When did it begin? How did it begin?

After a couple decades of confusion since Modernism, Post-modern art came to recognition around the 70's from the influence of many movements during the 40s 50s and 60s along with a reaction to the intellectual "high" art of Modernism which was focused on form and technique.

When did it end? Did it end?

It's not clear when or if it ended, but I believe around the late 80's and early 90's along with the birth of internet and new level of globalization.

What are the main principles associated with the Post-Modern Art Movement?

Opposing the ways of Modernism.

Who are the main artists/critics associated with it and what is the aesthetic character of Post-Modern Art.

Joseph Beuys, Jasper Johns, Frank Stella, Donald Judd, Andy Warhol

Define Modern

When did it begin? How did it begin?

Modernism began around 1890 with the birth of photography. Realistic and representational art was no longer the purpose of art and the artists of this time needed to find a new purpose.

When did it end?

The movement ended around 1940.

What are the main principles associated with the Modern art Movement?

Art moved away from being a tool to realistically portray things in the real world. Away from tradition.

Who are the main artists/critics associated with it and what is the aesthetic character of Modern Art.

Paul Cezanne, Edoured Manet, Picasso, Giacometti, Alexaner Calder

Abstraction, Experimental, Expressive, Purity.

Include five pictures of examples of Modern Art

List of Posts

post-modernism
post-fordism
post-colonialism
post-impressionism
post-altermodernism
post-minimalism
post-sculpture
post-feminism
post-ww1
post-ww2
post-apocalyptic
post-industrialism
post-cold war
post-pop
post-mao

post-capitalism

post-marxism

post-Hiroshima

post-production

post-alter-modern

post-abstract

post-painterly