I'm not really sure what to write here...
I started out by watching the videos for this module anyway, intending to get the throwaway work done first. The first video - the one on West Coast Pop Art - inspired a Pop Art exhibit idea.
I had already been toying with an Impressionist theme - from the time I read about the project I had been thinking about an Impressionism theme. I am not kidding when I say it's my favorite movement; I have had a fascination with the works of Monet since I was little - I have a huge coffee table book containing a biography and all his works, plus received calendars of his paintings until I was a teenager (they no longer had any works I hadn't seen.)
I ended up with a third idea when I randomly asked my fiance what he might do as an exhibit. So I thought wrote out three different exhibits:
- An Impressionism exhibit focusing on the changing nature of light
- A Pop Art exhibit looking at the evolution of the form, from the founders to "lowbrow"
- An exhibit looking at the history of water as a subject matter for art, from early civilization to now
My paper ideas were then passed around my household and the consensus was on the Impressionist exhibit (with one vote for Pop art, and one torn between Impressionism and water.)
Now, I came to the idea of light as the focus of the Impressionism theme simply by refreshing myself on the basis of the movement. I wanted an Impressionism theme because I wanted a showcase for Monet - my favorite artist - but I didn't want to it be just about him. One of the goals of this movement was to study light as naturally as possible - to recreate the way light changes a subject. To this end, Impressionists frequently painted the same subject matter over and over, but at different times of the day or during different seasons.
That's where I got the idea for the exhibit. I would showcase different Impressionist painters, and where I could I would pick paintings in a series reflecting directly the goal they were chasing - the changing nature of light. All paintings chosen would be a study of how light plays on the subject, whether part of a series or not.
I picked the PowerPoint format for a couple of reasons. First, it is designed to look like an art gallery space, and second, it gave a few choices of theme colors and the color palette for this one seemed most in line with Impressionist choice of colors. I've also refrained from using black in the PowerPoint (except for the text of the body) - much like the painters themselves refused to use the color. I picked the heading/title font because it looked like the way a painter might sign their work. Colors were picked to be pretty and complimentary of the paintings. Regular text is in a font people can read - I'm fond of Times New Roman.
Sunday, December 4, 2016
Thursday, December 1, 2016
Art Curation Videos
1. Key Concepts
West Coast Pop Art: Concepts for this video included the definition of "lowbrow" as an art theory/movement - what was being struggled against in the art world. "Lowbrow" was meant to be the opposite of "highbrow" - the term for the elite art scene. In the eyes of these artists, art had become too intelligent, to uppity, and too hard to understand. It wasn't made for the everyday audience, and that's who they wanted to appeal to. It also related "lowbrow" art back to other art forms/schools like surrealism and pop art. The other major concepts concerned the evolution of the "lowbrow" art form - the pioneers of the form, where their inspirations came from, and the types of art they created & influenced. These artists were very much inspired by the culture that emerged after WWII in the late 1940s and 1950s - the suburban & specifically West Coast surfer/skater cultures that emerged. These nostalgic cultural influences merged with the uneasy political climate of the 1960s & 1970s, and expressed itself in the evolution of animation, comics, and record cover artwork. The video also commented on the broad influence this West Coast movement had, inspiring artists up to the north in Canada.
Tate Modern: The main concept of this video was a showcase of the newly remodeled Tate Museum of Modern Art. It highlighted some goals of the new administration, such as the effort to include more diverse artists - more women, more artists form non-Western countries, etc. It highlighted the expansion of the collection; how the museum was trying to expand what was considered as art, not just installations but digital, interactive pieces and a performance art space. The video even gave a little peak at the warehouse that stores the pieces that are not currently on display. The video also worked hard to show how the museum was trying to remain accessible to a large audience despite being so vast as to be intimidating.
An Acquiring Mind: The main concept of this video was the Metropolitan Museum of Art (the Met) and its longest-running director. One of the focuses of the video was a portrait of the director (Philippe de Montebello), how he got to his position and what the focus of his administration was. It spotlighted a bunch of works that distinguished the collection and how this man obtained them. It also showed the broader work of the museum in how they go about getting permission to acquire pieces for the collection, how pieces are restored and otherwise conserved, and how gallery/exhibition spaces are physically set up.
2. Relation to Project
West Coast Pop Art: This particular video could be helpful - it was really interesting and inspiring because I am already a fan of pop art in general and found this particular subsect of it to be graphically pleasing. I am toying with the idea of doing a pop art theme for my curation project, but as I am unsure of my theme, this video may or may not be helpful.
Tate Modern: This video certainly got me thinking about gallery space and how to use it. The Tate is really vast and they had to choose exactly how to fill each space, even if that space was just going to have paintings. The way the works are set up in each room is important, because not everyone likes the same kind of art but you want everyone to find something of value in the rooms that they visit. It was a good lesson on how to make art available to everyone without seeming too elitist about it.
An Acquiring Mind: Now this video is super helpful for the project. It adds onto the Tate lessons about gallery space and exhibition set up. In addition, it makes you think really hard about what artworks to pick and why; how they are going to work with one another, what the flow of the exhibit would then look like, what the relations to the pieces are/how obvious you want to make that.
3. Opinion of Video
West Coast Pop Art: This video was very entertaining. There wasn't a lot of narration; it was mostly interviews with art history experts/artists/critics. These interview pieces were very interesting, engaging and even humorous, containing an awful lot of personal experience/encounters with this particular school of art. The interviews were cut away from for shots of artwork examples relating to the particular aspect of the movement that was being discussed. It was very colorful, showing not just gallery examples of artwork but pointing out artwork that I was more familiar with; aspects of culture like cartoons/comics (I'm a fan of comic artist Robert Crumb from a while back now), drug culture, and music. The video did a good job of showing a movement driven by a rapidly changing culture, while influencing/changing it at the same time.
Tate Video: This video was also very entertaining, though set up more like a television news article than a documentary. This video had two narrators of sorts that took us through the pieces of the video. The female reporter was very active - she was the one that took the audience on the tour of the gallery, and asked questions about the rooms and the exhibits of the administration. She was very friendly and accessible, asking questions that allowed the admin to go into detail about the topic. The male was usually cut to when more complex questions - questions about what is considered art and how should the Tate go about collecting/displaying/etc - were being asked. He was less friendly and more professional - reminded me a lot of the old 60 Minutes reporters. I also enjoyed how the video talked to some of the lesser known artists that were going to be displayed - it wasn't just about the museum stuff, it was about the art too.
An Acquiring Mind: This video wasn't quite as entertaining as the other two. The narrator was very engaging and had a sweet voice, but the topics being discussed were dryer than in the other two videos. I did really enjoy it when they talked about the artwork in the collection; both the highlighted coups of the collection and the conservation pieces that were shown were fascinating, and I found the whole conservation section very fascinating on its own. I noticed the video tried to tell a story of the Met and this director, but because it focused so much on the behind-the-scenes work life of a museum and less on the artwork, this storytelling mode made the video lag a little.
West Coast Pop Art: Concepts for this video included the definition of "lowbrow" as an art theory/movement - what was being struggled against in the art world. "Lowbrow" was meant to be the opposite of "highbrow" - the term for the elite art scene. In the eyes of these artists, art had become too intelligent, to uppity, and too hard to understand. It wasn't made for the everyday audience, and that's who they wanted to appeal to. It also related "lowbrow" art back to other art forms/schools like surrealism and pop art. The other major concepts concerned the evolution of the "lowbrow" art form - the pioneers of the form, where their inspirations came from, and the types of art they created & influenced. These artists were very much inspired by the culture that emerged after WWII in the late 1940s and 1950s - the suburban & specifically West Coast surfer/skater cultures that emerged. These nostalgic cultural influences merged with the uneasy political climate of the 1960s & 1970s, and expressed itself in the evolution of animation, comics, and record cover artwork. The video also commented on the broad influence this West Coast movement had, inspiring artists up to the north in Canada.
Tate Modern: The main concept of this video was a showcase of the newly remodeled Tate Museum of Modern Art. It highlighted some goals of the new administration, such as the effort to include more diverse artists - more women, more artists form non-Western countries, etc. It highlighted the expansion of the collection; how the museum was trying to expand what was considered as art, not just installations but digital, interactive pieces and a performance art space. The video even gave a little peak at the warehouse that stores the pieces that are not currently on display. The video also worked hard to show how the museum was trying to remain accessible to a large audience despite being so vast as to be intimidating.
An Acquiring Mind: The main concept of this video was the Metropolitan Museum of Art (the Met) and its longest-running director. One of the focuses of the video was a portrait of the director (Philippe de Montebello), how he got to his position and what the focus of his administration was. It spotlighted a bunch of works that distinguished the collection and how this man obtained them. It also showed the broader work of the museum in how they go about getting permission to acquire pieces for the collection, how pieces are restored and otherwise conserved, and how gallery/exhibition spaces are physically set up.
2. Relation to Project
West Coast Pop Art: This particular video could be helpful - it was really interesting and inspiring because I am already a fan of pop art in general and found this particular subsect of it to be graphically pleasing. I am toying with the idea of doing a pop art theme for my curation project, but as I am unsure of my theme, this video may or may not be helpful.
Tate Modern: This video certainly got me thinking about gallery space and how to use it. The Tate is really vast and they had to choose exactly how to fill each space, even if that space was just going to have paintings. The way the works are set up in each room is important, because not everyone likes the same kind of art but you want everyone to find something of value in the rooms that they visit. It was a good lesson on how to make art available to everyone without seeming too elitist about it.
An Acquiring Mind: Now this video is super helpful for the project. It adds onto the Tate lessons about gallery space and exhibition set up. In addition, it makes you think really hard about what artworks to pick and why; how they are going to work with one another, what the flow of the exhibit would then look like, what the relations to the pieces are/how obvious you want to make that.
3. Opinion of Video
West Coast Pop Art: This video was very entertaining. There wasn't a lot of narration; it was mostly interviews with art history experts/artists/critics. These interview pieces were very interesting, engaging and even humorous, containing an awful lot of personal experience/encounters with this particular school of art. The interviews were cut away from for shots of artwork examples relating to the particular aspect of the movement that was being discussed. It was very colorful, showing not just gallery examples of artwork but pointing out artwork that I was more familiar with; aspects of culture like cartoons/comics (I'm a fan of comic artist Robert Crumb from a while back now), drug culture, and music. The video did a good job of showing a movement driven by a rapidly changing culture, while influencing/changing it at the same time.
Tate Video: This video was also very entertaining, though set up more like a television news article than a documentary. This video had two narrators of sorts that took us through the pieces of the video. The female reporter was very active - she was the one that took the audience on the tour of the gallery, and asked questions about the rooms and the exhibits of the administration. She was very friendly and accessible, asking questions that allowed the admin to go into detail about the topic. The male was usually cut to when more complex questions - questions about what is considered art and how should the Tate go about collecting/displaying/etc - were being asked. He was less friendly and more professional - reminded me a lot of the old 60 Minutes reporters. I also enjoyed how the video talked to some of the lesser known artists that were going to be displayed - it wasn't just about the museum stuff, it was about the art too.
An Acquiring Mind: This video wasn't quite as entertaining as the other two. The narrator was very engaging and had a sweet voice, but the topics being discussed were dryer than in the other two videos. I did really enjoy it when they talked about the artwork in the collection; both the highlighted coups of the collection and the conservation pieces that were shown were fascinating, and I found the whole conservation section very fascinating on its own. I noticed the video tried to tell a story of the Met and this director, but because it focused so much on the behind-the-scenes work life of a museum and less on the artwork, this storytelling mode made the video lag a little.
Sunday, November 20, 2016
Modern & Postmodern Art [Videos]
1. I decided that my two videos would be: Abstract Expressionism and Pop: Art of the 50s & 60s, and Uncertainty: Modernity and Art. I picked the first video because I'm definitely interested in the material - my mother's favorite artist is Pollock, the father of Abstract Expressionism, while additionally Pop Art through the 50s & 60s has always fascinated me. I love the colors and style of Pop Art. I was going between the Modernity video and the Warhol video, but I think I'd rather study Warhol on my own so I chose the video with the mysterious title.
2. The Abstract Expressionism/Pop video was set up much like the Expressionism video for Mod 11. Essentially, the whole video is broken up into bits that closely examine one work of one artist, breaks it down, and analyzes it in context with the style/school of art that we are talking about. The Uncertainty video is much more of a dynamic documentary. This particular video is weaving a story about what Modern Art is and what it went through to get here. It tells this story in a dynamic way, weaving stories about artwork into facts about the changing climate of the world at the time.
3. I feel as if I'm repeating myself for the Abstract Expressionism/Pop video - this video is very good at giving a broad number of examples of the style simply described in the textbook. The textbook gives a good theological base for the style of art being described, but it only gives one or two examples and focuses more on Jackson Pollock than anywhere else. This video does a better job at giving examples of the style and background as to how it came about (by providing background on each artist & the painting being focused on.) The Uncertainty video really ties the theology described in the book into world history and its impact on art. It looks at artwork and analyzes it, but it doesn't spend the entire time looking at artwork as examples. Instead, the Uncertainty video ties in different questions about life, society, etc with the paintings & the broader environment they came out of.
4. The narrator for the Abstract Expressionism/Pop video appears to be the same one from the Expressionist video. He sounds like an English professor lecturing, but not in a boring or dry way. The filming of the video is also the same, allowing the narrator to break each image down for analysis and lead us around as we look at it. The narrator for the Uncertainty video was much more dynamic - his tone & pitch changed depending upon the subject matter upon which he was speaking. Additionally, the Uncertainty video is shot more like a documentary film for theater than something meant for teaching. The camera is always moving, switching between artwork and shots from life. I really like the art history tying into world history aspect of this video. To be very honest, I feel like this video actually talks more meaningfully about Abstract Expressionism/Pop Art than the previous video did. Uncertainty tied the morals of the movement to the broader culture better than either the book or the previous video.
2. The Abstract Expressionism/Pop video was set up much like the Expressionism video for Mod 11. Essentially, the whole video is broken up into bits that closely examine one work of one artist, breaks it down, and analyzes it in context with the style/school of art that we are talking about. The Uncertainty video is much more of a dynamic documentary. This particular video is weaving a story about what Modern Art is and what it went through to get here. It tells this story in a dynamic way, weaving stories about artwork into facts about the changing climate of the world at the time.
3. I feel as if I'm repeating myself for the Abstract Expressionism/Pop video - this video is very good at giving a broad number of examples of the style simply described in the textbook. The textbook gives a good theological base for the style of art being described, but it only gives one or two examples and focuses more on Jackson Pollock than anywhere else. This video does a better job at giving examples of the style and background as to how it came about (by providing background on each artist & the painting being focused on.) The Uncertainty video really ties the theology described in the book into world history and its impact on art. It looks at artwork and analyzes it, but it doesn't spend the entire time looking at artwork as examples. Instead, the Uncertainty video ties in different questions about life, society, etc with the paintings & the broader environment they came out of.
4. The narrator for the Abstract Expressionism/Pop video appears to be the same one from the Expressionist video. He sounds like an English professor lecturing, but not in a boring or dry way. The filming of the video is also the same, allowing the narrator to break each image down for analysis and lead us around as we look at it. The narrator for the Uncertainty video was much more dynamic - his tone & pitch changed depending upon the subject matter upon which he was speaking. Additionally, the Uncertainty video is shot more like a documentary film for theater than something meant for teaching. The camera is always moving, switching between artwork and shots from life. I really like the art history tying into world history aspect of this video. To be very honest, I feel like this video actually talks more meaningfully about Abstract Expressionism/Pop Art than the previous video did. Uncertainty tied the morals of the movement to the broader culture better than either the book or the previous video.
Saturday, November 19, 2016
Second Visit to the Albright-Knox
The Exhibit
1. The exhibit I chose for this was Rosalyn Drexler: Who Does She Think She Is?
2. The theme of the exhibit was the body of work by the artist Rosalyn Drexler. Her body of work is large & varied: she has painted, wrote, done theater - even wrestled at one point! The exhibit was mostly a showcase of her paintings, which focus on love & violence between men & women. The author has a very feminist viewpoint that shows clearly in the works as a whole. Additionally, some of her writings were featured under glass in the exhibit.
The Gallery
1. The lighting of the exhibit didn't appear to be special - there were no colors used, the lights were not particularly dim or bright or focused on anything specific.
2. The walls were mostly white, however there were temporary walls constructed in a couple of the rooms of the exhibition which were painted bright, intense colors that matched the way the artist herself used color. In combination with the white building walls, this gave the exhibit more of a Pop art/1960s look and complimented the style of the artists' paintings.
3. The interior architecture of the space is varied. The main structure of the gallery is simplistic and of an older style. There are a few pieces of intricate molding, and the ceilings are somewhat high, but other than that, the gallery is very simplistic. The rest of the architecture consists of the few constructed walls in a couple of the gallery rooms. These are simplistic rectangular structures, painted bright colors and highlighting a particular painting and/or the theme of the works in that room. I would assume all the materials of the architecture are plaster or drywall, but they didn't want us touching anything. Also, there were glass-enclosed tables against some of the walls showcasing the artist as a writer, though much of it wasn't meant for us to actually read.
4. The movement of the viewer through the gallery space is very free and open. There are a couple of big rooms with artwork posted every few feet, and there are smaller rooms set up much the same way. One of the smaller rooms connecting to the larger gallery spaces was meant for viewing a video related to the exhibit, but it was not set up to be the first thing you encounter before seeing the rest of the exhibit. It's very obvious that the exhibit was set up to be self-guided; the viewer should look at what they want, when they want and not be directed about.
The Artwork
1. I don't feel like the artworks were organized in any particular fashion - though I do believe that they chose a specific theme of the artists work because she is very prolific in a variety of ways. The artworks chosen were all portraying the relationships between men and women (with very, very few exceptions); sometimes hopeful or loving, sometimes violent.
2. As mentioned above, the artworks were all connected by theme, among other things. They were all about the varying relationships between men & women. Additionally, as someone educated on feminism & having read feminist literature, those viewpoints come through very strongly in many of the paintings in the exhibit. The actual artistic style employed by Drexler is very obvious in all of the works in the exhibit as well; it's very Pop art, with lots of bright colors and negative space. The forms are bright and easily identifiable, though not particularly sharply defined - they could easily blend into the background. One last similarity: she is a multi-media artist. Drexler's works are usually some blend of collage and acrylic paint on canvas.
3. The artworks are different individually, generally by emotion/mood. Violence is a common theme, but sometimes is is anger being portrayed, while other times it is less personal/more objective. Not all of her artwork is violent. Love is shown, contentment as well. Some works I felt had a air of cynicism, others seemed like a portrayal of disinterest.
4. The artworks were framed in such a way as to make them look not-framed. The frame did not extend past the work, and only served to hold it away from the wall. This allowed the Pop art aspect to be more highlighted/enhanced, as the bright splashes of paintings on the white walls was more stark with a lack of framing.
5. The artworks are identified with plaques showing the title, date, material, and credit either to the right or the left of the artwork (it changed.)
6. The works of art are spaced roughly equidistantly throughout the gallery. There appeared to be no special, close groupings of any work. The works are not so far apart as to stand out very much. The exception of this are the works hanging on the couple of temporary walls - each wall generally has only one painting hanging on it, setting a "theme" of the room - pictures particularly showing gangsters verses general, less-themed paintings.
Art Criticism Exercise
Description - I see the form of a woman in fur and a blue hat smoking on a red background. Elements of her attire blend in with the background
Description - The painting features two figures engaged in a struggle. The figure on top is a woman, blonde, with her breasts nearly hanging out of her open dress. She is wielding a weapon, and is struggling with an African-American man against a dark blue background.
Formal Analysis - Unity is a principle much more evident in this painting. If you took the two figures separately, the painting wouldn't make much sense; it requires the two figures together to convey its message. I believe value was used here as well, though less as a gradient for shadow and more for a value in skin tone - dark opposed to light. This may also apply to contrast. Movement is more evident in this painting than the one before, as the figures are actively engaged in a struggle and are placed in a dynamic diagonal fashion. Color, as with the painting before, is very prominent and very intense.
Bracketing - This art piece could be a scene from a movie. It's very highly stylized and the intense colors remind me of intense filmmaking. This scene would be drawn out in some way, but no matter how it ended it would be very dramatic.
Interpretation - This works meaning is very straightforward. Titled as Self-Defense, it seems to be portraying a woman defending herself from an attacker of some sort. Her dress being open the way it is seems to be implying that the crime was a rape. As both a feminist and a survivor of sexual assault, I can feel the anger coming from the woman defending herself. However, I am still left with a couple of questions. The use of color doesn't seem to suggest anger; in fact, the use of blue is more calming. Yet it could signify something simpler like darkness, putting the occurrence in a dark place or at a dark time of day - the background is just simple color so setting is left to the viewer. Additionally, I wonder if the racial differences mean anything significant - this was painted around the time of the intense racial struggles of the 1960s and while I cannot see a message from this standpoint, it doesn't mean that there isn't one.
Description - the painting had two figures - two heads, one male/one female, both of whom are smoking cigarettes. The figures are in shades of orange upon a darker background
Format Analysis - This particular piece seems very balanced to me, with where the figures are positioned especially (one in the upper left, one in the lower right). Additionally, there is unity in the photo, shown by the figures doing the same act. I feel like color was not used to convey emotion in this, but for emphasis. The figures are lighter colored than the background, emphasizing them, but the cigarettes are even more prominent (white against the dark), drawing even more focus to them.
Bracketing - This piece feels like it could be from a cigarette ad in a newspaper. It's more flat than the other two works, and it doesn't feel like there's any motion from the figures.
Interpretation - I feel like this was one of Drexler's works that tried to convey a very disinterested or cynical version of the world. It's almost as if the figures in the work don't care about the warning in the title. That cigarette smoking, however hazardous it might be, still evokes feelings in the figures, shown by the colors radiating in them. The figures seem warm, as if smoking is a comfort in a dark & cold world.
The other pictures I took while there can be found in this Photobucket album: http://s350.photobucket.com/user/amynewt87/library/Art%20Gallery
I always enjoy visiting the gallery, and it was interesting to contemplate the space used for paintings (not just sculpture, which I am more aware of when I view.) But it didn't particularly enhance or change the way I go and view artwork.
1. The exhibit I chose for this was Rosalyn Drexler: Who Does She Think She Is?
2. The theme of the exhibit was the body of work by the artist Rosalyn Drexler. Her body of work is large & varied: she has painted, wrote, done theater - even wrestled at one point! The exhibit was mostly a showcase of her paintings, which focus on love & violence between men & women. The author has a very feminist viewpoint that shows clearly in the works as a whole. Additionally, some of her writings were featured under glass in the exhibit.
The Gallery
1. The lighting of the exhibit didn't appear to be special - there were no colors used, the lights were not particularly dim or bright or focused on anything specific.
2. The walls were mostly white, however there were temporary walls constructed in a couple of the rooms of the exhibition which were painted bright, intense colors that matched the way the artist herself used color. In combination with the white building walls, this gave the exhibit more of a Pop art/1960s look and complimented the style of the artists' paintings.
3. The interior architecture of the space is varied. The main structure of the gallery is simplistic and of an older style. There are a few pieces of intricate molding, and the ceilings are somewhat high, but other than that, the gallery is very simplistic. The rest of the architecture consists of the few constructed walls in a couple of the gallery rooms. These are simplistic rectangular structures, painted bright colors and highlighting a particular painting and/or the theme of the works in that room. I would assume all the materials of the architecture are plaster or drywall, but they didn't want us touching anything. Also, there were glass-enclosed tables against some of the walls showcasing the artist as a writer, though much of it wasn't meant for us to actually read.
4. The movement of the viewer through the gallery space is very free and open. There are a couple of big rooms with artwork posted every few feet, and there are smaller rooms set up much the same way. One of the smaller rooms connecting to the larger gallery spaces was meant for viewing a video related to the exhibit, but it was not set up to be the first thing you encounter before seeing the rest of the exhibit. It's very obvious that the exhibit was set up to be self-guided; the viewer should look at what they want, when they want and not be directed about.
The Artwork
1. I don't feel like the artworks were organized in any particular fashion - though I do believe that they chose a specific theme of the artists work because she is very prolific in a variety of ways. The artworks chosen were all portraying the relationships between men and women (with very, very few exceptions); sometimes hopeful or loving, sometimes violent.
2. As mentioned above, the artworks were all connected by theme, among other things. They were all about the varying relationships between men & women. Additionally, as someone educated on feminism & having read feminist literature, those viewpoints come through very strongly in many of the paintings in the exhibit. The actual artistic style employed by Drexler is very obvious in all of the works in the exhibit as well; it's very Pop art, with lots of bright colors and negative space. The forms are bright and easily identifiable, though not particularly sharply defined - they could easily blend into the background. One last similarity: she is a multi-media artist. Drexler's works are usually some blend of collage and acrylic paint on canvas.
3. The artworks are different individually, generally by emotion/mood. Violence is a common theme, but sometimes is is anger being portrayed, while other times it is less personal/more objective. Not all of her artwork is violent. Love is shown, contentment as well. Some works I felt had a air of cynicism, others seemed like a portrayal of disinterest.
4. The artworks were framed in such a way as to make them look not-framed. The frame did not extend past the work, and only served to hold it away from the wall. This allowed the Pop art aspect to be more highlighted/enhanced, as the bright splashes of paintings on the white walls was more stark with a lack of framing.
5. The artworks are identified with plaques showing the title, date, material, and credit either to the right or the left of the artwork (it changed.)
6. The works of art are spaced roughly equidistantly throughout the gallery. There appeared to be no special, close groupings of any work. The works are not so far apart as to stand out very much. The exception of this are the works hanging on the couple of temporary walls - each wall generally has only one painting hanging on it, setting a "theme" of the room - pictures particularly showing gangsters verses general, less-themed paintings.
 |
| Rosalyn Drexler Chain Smoker Acrylic & paper collage on canvas 1960 [my picture] |
Description - I see the form of a woman in fur and a blue hat smoking on a red background. Elements of her attire blend in with the background
Formal Analysis - Space is utilized in this painting; the figure is positioned in the lower left of the canvas & the rest of the composition is blank. This utilization is combined with the Color element; the red of the background is intense & blends with the figure. Texture is also employed in this painting; the clothes of the figure are constructed to convey the texture of fur. I suppose motion could be an principle in play here; what we can see of her lower body appears to be suggesting walking, as one leg seems outlined as being in front of the other one.
Bracketing - This artwork reminds me of the sophisticated ladies of LA or NYC in the 1960s. She looks like she might be a model of some sort, or an actress on the way to an audition. Smoking makes her seem more sophisticated & glamorous, rooted in portrayals of Silver Screen Starlets like Marilyn Monroe.
Interpretation - I interpret this painting to be about the emotion of smoking. The figure in the painting seems to be in transit, on the way somewhere. Generally, there is a level of stress being dealt with when rushing off to meetings, appointments, or jobs. The stress seems to pulsate in the red around the woman, and is both feeding and being fed by the cigarette she is smoking. Smoking raises heart rates & stimulates the brain, yet many smokers describe the calming effects of the behavior. I think stress, motion, and smoking intertwining is the message of this particular painting
 |
| Rosalyn Drexler Self-Defense Acrylic & paper collage on canvas 1963 [my photo] |
Description - The painting features two figures engaged in a struggle. The figure on top is a woman, blonde, with her breasts nearly hanging out of her open dress. She is wielding a weapon, and is struggling with an African-American man against a dark blue background.
Formal Analysis - Unity is a principle much more evident in this painting. If you took the two figures separately, the painting wouldn't make much sense; it requires the two figures together to convey its message. I believe value was used here as well, though less as a gradient for shadow and more for a value in skin tone - dark opposed to light. This may also apply to contrast. Movement is more evident in this painting than the one before, as the figures are actively engaged in a struggle and are placed in a dynamic diagonal fashion. Color, as with the painting before, is very prominent and very intense.
Bracketing - This art piece could be a scene from a movie. It's very highly stylized and the intense colors remind me of intense filmmaking. This scene would be drawn out in some way, but no matter how it ended it would be very dramatic.
Interpretation - This works meaning is very straightforward. Titled as Self-Defense, it seems to be portraying a woman defending herself from an attacker of some sort. Her dress being open the way it is seems to be implying that the crime was a rape. As both a feminist and a survivor of sexual assault, I can feel the anger coming from the woman defending herself. However, I am still left with a couple of questions. The use of color doesn't seem to suggest anger; in fact, the use of blue is more calming. Yet it could signify something simpler like darkness, putting the occurrence in a dark place or at a dark time of day - the background is just simple color so setting is left to the viewer. Additionally, I wonder if the racial differences mean anything significant - this was painted around the time of the intense racial struggles of the 1960s and while I cannot see a message from this standpoint, it doesn't mean that there isn't one.
 |
| Rosalyn Drexler Cigarette Smoking May be Hazardous to Your Health Acrylic & paper collage on canvas 1967 [my photo] |
Description - the painting had two figures - two heads, one male/one female, both of whom are smoking cigarettes. The figures are in shades of orange upon a darker background
Format Analysis - This particular piece seems very balanced to me, with where the figures are positioned especially (one in the upper left, one in the lower right). Additionally, there is unity in the photo, shown by the figures doing the same act. I feel like color was not used to convey emotion in this, but for emphasis. The figures are lighter colored than the background, emphasizing them, but the cigarettes are even more prominent (white against the dark), drawing even more focus to them.
Bracketing - This piece feels like it could be from a cigarette ad in a newspaper. It's more flat than the other two works, and it doesn't feel like there's any motion from the figures.
Interpretation - I feel like this was one of Drexler's works that tried to convey a very disinterested or cynical version of the world. It's almost as if the figures in the work don't care about the warning in the title. That cigarette smoking, however hazardous it might be, still evokes feelings in the figures, shown by the colors radiating in them. The figures seem warm, as if smoking is a comfort in a dark & cold world.
The other pictures I took while there can be found in this Photobucket album: http://s350.photobucket.com/user/amynewt87/library/Art%20Gallery
I always enjoy visiting the gallery, and it was interesting to contemplate the space used for paintings (not just sculpture, which I am more aware of when I view.) But it didn't particularly enhance or change the way I go and view artwork.
Friday, November 18, 2016
Videos on the Modern World of Art
1. The two videos I picked were the one on Matisse & Picasso, and the one on Expressionism. I found the videos difficult to choose this time. I have a passing interest in everything discussed, but no real motivations/feeling about it - kinda wish there had been a video on Impressionism. I chose the Matisse/Picasso one because I am stimulated by Picasso's art and seeing his work compared with another sounded intriguing. I picked the video on Expressionism because it's one of the art styles I'm not very familiar with and I really wanted a little more information. I was interested in Dada & Surrealism too, but I know more about those so I went with expressionism.
2. The Matisse/Picasso video was very much an overview of the lives & friendship of the two artists. It worked very hard to show the social & political climate of the times, really focusing on the human element as it relates to art. The video really seemed to want to show the way these artists created, and compared/contrasted the two works frequently. The Expressionism video, by contrast, was focused solely on the artworks produced under this genre, and analyzed them while giving a very brief biography of the artist & the time they lived in. This video took multiple works/artists and broke them down to show what was behind them rather than bothering with individual artists.
3. The Matisse/Picasso video was able to give me a broader look into the artists' lives than the book did. The book has only a brief, one-page biography on both artists, though it takes more time throughout the book to look at/analyze their art. The book looked at a lot of Picasso's art in particular in chapters before, as examples for whatever we had been talking about. The video gave a more complete picture of the two artists as artists and showed the creative processes a little more. The Expressionism video was meant to expound upon what Expressionism is - or at least I thought that's what the video would do. I suppose I understand Expressionism a little better now, but the book's definition made me think more abstractly than the examples I was shown in the video. I was under the impression that Expressionism was a lot like Postmodern Poetry; if the focus is to be on the expression of emotions, then I did not expect to see very solid forms or coherency in the paintings in the way that I did.
4. The Matisse/Picasso video was alright - the narrator was strong and almost mystical in a way. He seemed to really want to draw the reader into a story about these artists, even if it's history and you kind of already know what happens. The Expressionism video was much better. Even though the narrator wasn't as strong, he was very proper and did a good job describing the paintings and what was going on. Additionally, I enjoyed the way this video was filmed/edited. They did a good job filming the paintings so that I could actually see the analysis come to life. I can't always do that when artwork is broken down.
2. The Matisse/Picasso video was very much an overview of the lives & friendship of the two artists. It worked very hard to show the social & political climate of the times, really focusing on the human element as it relates to art. The video really seemed to want to show the way these artists created, and compared/contrasted the two works frequently. The Expressionism video, by contrast, was focused solely on the artworks produced under this genre, and analyzed them while giving a very brief biography of the artist & the time they lived in. This video took multiple works/artists and broke them down to show what was behind them rather than bothering with individual artists.
3. The Matisse/Picasso video was able to give me a broader look into the artists' lives than the book did. The book has only a brief, one-page biography on both artists, though it takes more time throughout the book to look at/analyze their art. The book looked at a lot of Picasso's art in particular in chapters before, as examples for whatever we had been talking about. The video gave a more complete picture of the two artists as artists and showed the creative processes a little more. The Expressionism video was meant to expound upon what Expressionism is - or at least I thought that's what the video would do. I suppose I understand Expressionism a little better now, but the book's definition made me think more abstractly than the examples I was shown in the video. I was under the impression that Expressionism was a lot like Postmodern Poetry; if the focus is to be on the expression of emotions, then I did not expect to see very solid forms or coherency in the paintings in the way that I did.
4. The Matisse/Picasso video was alright - the narrator was strong and almost mystical in a way. He seemed to really want to draw the reader into a story about these artists, even if it's history and you kind of already know what happens. The Expressionism video was much better. Even though the narrator wasn't as strong, he was very proper and did a good job describing the paintings and what was going on. Additionally, I enjoyed the way this video was filmed/edited. They did a good job filming the paintings so that I could actually see the analysis come to life. I can't always do that when artwork is broken down.
Monday, November 7, 2016
Exploring Line by Drawing Hands
1. I did not enjoy using my hands as subjects. For one, I have heard more than one artist in my life talk about how hard it is to draw hands - and then you wanted me to do it with my non-dominant hand. Isn't this supposed to be an introductory course? Why would you do that?? The only reason mine look this good is because I started out by tracing my hands in the first place. There was no way I was going to try doing the palms of my hands; talk about something too difficult for an amateur, non-major artist! At the very least, I like doing my nails and can draw them.
2. I selected pencil because charcoal is expensive and I would have never used it outside of this class. Pencil, on the other hand, is something all my classes require; you can't mark a Scantron without one, so I generally have those on hand.
3. I hate working with my left hand. I am very, very right-handed. My left hand is really only good for holding things and helping me type. I definitely cannot draw anything near a straight line with with, so in my drawing any lines on the top hand that look scribbled or something weird/not sketchy are because I used that hand. I started just vaguely sketching what I wanted with the left and then switching to my right to make it actually look like something.
4. I think my drawing is a decent representation of my hands. Kind of, anyway. Color would help, because I'm very pale and my veins stick out a lot but it would look a lot better to see the bluish tint under a skin color than in a black & white sketch. I'd also like color for my nails, because my hobby is doing my nails and I do a lot of fancy nail art that would be fun to re-create on paper. My nails this time were a glittery black, which I obviously can't show in this black & white sketch (I had accent nails that were red with a gold foil over it that I sketched out too - that's why a couple of the nails are sketched differently)
5. I would not use my non-dominant hand for any artwork unless it was helping my dominant hand out. I certainly would not sketch or try to create forms with it in any way. I probably wouldn't even use it to cut with because I'd probably end up cutting myself.
Thursday, November 3, 2016
Non-Western Art
1. I picked the Legacy of Oppression video because I am very politically active, and I enjoy learning about the history of ideologies like racism. It helps me understand better how important/destructive imperialism is, and helps me understand the emotions behind modern activism. I believe in learning from history to better understand modernity. The other video I chose was the one on Buddhism because I am a fan of old kung-fu movies and many of the monk characters are Buddhist. It is a religion that has always fascinated me and I enjoy learning about it.
2. There were two key concepts from the Legacy of Oppression video. The first concept/theme was about the different pieces of art - what they meant/represented, the history of the culture that made it. The second theme/concept was about the colonization of the Congo by the Germans, which is how many of the art pieces came to the exhibit talked about in the first theme. The video really went in depth with the atrocities committed against the Central Africans. The video on Buddhism was partly about the history of the religion & how it came up, but it was also a history of the art - the subject matter, the representations, & the depictions of important events.
3. The Legacy of Oppression video was a very specific look at the colonization of Africa, which is something that the book doesn't go into. While the book does look overall at the different civilizations of Africa and the art that came from them, the book heavily focuses on the artwork, breaking it down and analyzing it. The video gave me environmental historical context the book only glosses over. The same thing kind of goes with the Buddhism video. The book looks at ancient India/China as a whole, and is particularly focused on the kinds of art that came from those cultures. The book does have one section on how the Buddha is portrayed but it's only one page, it doesn't really go into what Buddhism is and how the art is connected to it. This video is really in-depth; it goes into the foundations of Buddhism and how the art came out of Buddhism in general.
4. The Legacy of Oppression video was very very good. I really enjoyed the woman who was talking about the pieces of artwork; she was very knowledgeable. I also really enjoyed that they didn't try to sugarcoat or otherwise tone down the level of violence/atrocities that were committed in the course of German conquest. I appreciated the willingness to show me, openly, how terrible the treatment was. The Buddhism video was very good; it was very respectful and quiet, allowing you to hear some of the beauty of Buddhist chants/prayers. The narrator was very good in this one; he had the right tone of voice and it worked very well with the beautiful depictions of Buddhism.
2. There were two key concepts from the Legacy of Oppression video. The first concept/theme was about the different pieces of art - what they meant/represented, the history of the culture that made it. The second theme/concept was about the colonization of the Congo by the Germans, which is how many of the art pieces came to the exhibit talked about in the first theme. The video really went in depth with the atrocities committed against the Central Africans. The video on Buddhism was partly about the history of the religion & how it came up, but it was also a history of the art - the subject matter, the representations, & the depictions of important events.
3. The Legacy of Oppression video was a very specific look at the colonization of Africa, which is something that the book doesn't go into. While the book does look overall at the different civilizations of Africa and the art that came from them, the book heavily focuses on the artwork, breaking it down and analyzing it. The video gave me environmental historical context the book only glosses over. The same thing kind of goes with the Buddhism video. The book looks at ancient India/China as a whole, and is particularly focused on the kinds of art that came from those cultures. The book does have one section on how the Buddha is portrayed but it's only one page, it doesn't really go into what Buddhism is and how the art is connected to it. This video is really in-depth; it goes into the foundations of Buddhism and how the art came out of Buddhism in general.
4. The Legacy of Oppression video was very very good. I really enjoyed the woman who was talking about the pieces of artwork; she was very knowledgeable. I also really enjoyed that they didn't try to sugarcoat or otherwise tone down the level of violence/atrocities that were committed in the course of German conquest. I appreciated the willingness to show me, openly, how terrible the treatment was. The Buddhism video was very good; it was very respectful and quiet, allowing you to hear some of the beauty of Buddhist chants/prayers. The narrator was very good in this one; he had the right tone of voice and it worked very well with the beautiful depictions of Buddhism.
Wednesday, November 2, 2016
Masters of the Renaissance
1. I chose the video on Leonardo Da Vinci because I have always been fascinated by him as a person. He really was the definition of the "Renaissance Man" and I have tried to emulate it in my own life. I chose the El Greco video because he's one of the artists I don't know much about; I know he paints all his figures like they're starving to death but other than that I wasn't really knowledgeable about him.
2. The key concept or theme of the Da Vinci video was Da Vinci's life. It didn't really go in depth with things like his art techniques or his works; the video was much more about facets of his life. It looked at his schooling, his environment, his influences, and the friends he made. Like the Da Vinci video, the El Greco video also looks at his life & what was going on around him while he created his famous works. I feel like the El Greco video was more rife with intrigue/drama. There was a lot of political turmoil in his lifetime. I was amazed by the problems El Greco had just from painting.
3. The Da Vinci video ties into the readings by showing a real-life example of a member of the High Renaissance. The book touched upon the art of this period, pointing out quintessential examples and breaking them down. But the video gave me more of a broader understanding of the world the artist lived in and how it influenced the art. I guess the El Greco video helps me see a different side of the Renaissance. El Greco was part of the Renaissance, though he is more associated with Spain than Italy. Yet, he didn't use the overtly beautiful, sculpted, seemingly perfect forms that dominated the Renaissance at the time. I said above that his style is to make his figures look gaunt and dark, as if they are starving to death or something.
4. I enjoyed the Da Vinci video a lot; I thought it was beautifully done. The scenes were shot very well, transposed with the art of the master to really make a point about where the art showed up in the life of Da Vinci. The music was beautiful, and the narrator had a very soft, lovely voice that told Da Vinci's life as a beautiful story. I had an issue with the El Greco video - the editing would leave these spaces where there were images fading but there wasn't any sound, not even background music. I kept thinking the video was broken somehow. It wasn't a really good way to transition to important points in history. I also find the narrator for that video to be too booming for the video, though some of that changes like 20 minutes into the video. I think it's poor audio quality. Problems like these make the video hard to watch.
2. The key concept or theme of the Da Vinci video was Da Vinci's life. It didn't really go in depth with things like his art techniques or his works; the video was much more about facets of his life. It looked at his schooling, his environment, his influences, and the friends he made. Like the Da Vinci video, the El Greco video also looks at his life & what was going on around him while he created his famous works. I feel like the El Greco video was more rife with intrigue/drama. There was a lot of political turmoil in his lifetime. I was amazed by the problems El Greco had just from painting.
3. The Da Vinci video ties into the readings by showing a real-life example of a member of the High Renaissance. The book touched upon the art of this period, pointing out quintessential examples and breaking them down. But the video gave me more of a broader understanding of the world the artist lived in and how it influenced the art. I guess the El Greco video helps me see a different side of the Renaissance. El Greco was part of the Renaissance, though he is more associated with Spain than Italy. Yet, he didn't use the overtly beautiful, sculpted, seemingly perfect forms that dominated the Renaissance at the time. I said above that his style is to make his figures look gaunt and dark, as if they are starving to death or something.
4. I enjoyed the Da Vinci video a lot; I thought it was beautifully done. The scenes were shot very well, transposed with the art of the master to really make a point about where the art showed up in the life of Da Vinci. The music was beautiful, and the narrator had a very soft, lovely voice that told Da Vinci's life as a beautiful story. I had an issue with the El Greco video - the editing would leave these spaces where there were images fading but there wasn't any sound, not even background music. I kept thinking the video was broken somehow. It wasn't a really good way to transition to important points in history. I also find the narrator for that video to be too booming for the video, though some of that changes like 20 minutes into the video. I think it's poor audio quality. Problems like these make the video hard to watch.
Saturday, October 22, 2016
Ancient Art
I selected the video on the Luttrell Psalter in part because the video on the Illuminated Manuscript wasn't working. I love books; this is something that everyone in my life comments on. I own a lot of books, I read a lot, and I'm compared often to fictional characters with the same traits. This video seemed close to the one on the Illuminated Manuscript - it was about the illustrations in medieval books and I had never heard of the Luttrell Psalter before. I really enjoyed this video - the artwork was fascinating and I enjoyed the descriptions behind each one.
Key concept from More Human Than Human: Humans don't really like realism in their artwork; they want exaggerated perfection. What constitutes this has changed throughout time/history, but trend continues into modern media today.
Key concept from Art & Life in the Middle Ages: the Luttrell Psalter. The whole video shows the illustrations in the Psalter. Shows not only illustrations of the Biblical stories contained within, but also has strange depictions of everyday life and some depictions of saintly stories.
The first video related to the readings in the text by delving into a specific feature of ancient art - while the book covered more general themes. The video specifically looked at how the human form was depicted in different cultures throughout ancient times, and explored the reason behind the specific exaggerations that were often depicted. The second video really delved into what the drawings in an illuminated manuscript represented - what stories they told, what symbols they contained, etc. The book makes only a passing mention on illuminated manuscripts in its section on the Early Middle Ages, but that's maybe one of the most fascinating things from the Middle Ages. I have a fondness for the beauty of illuminated manuscripts.
I pretty much explained how the videos added depth to the text I was already reading - that's how it relates, is to add depth in the first place. But I really liked these videos. They were less dry and had more interesting subject matter than many of the others I've been made to watch. The narration for the first video was interesting and engaging and I enjoyed the exploration of the development of the human figure in ancient art. While the narrator for the second video was a little dry, I was absolutely fascinated by the art that was shown - I loved getting to see it close up - and I learned a lot about the culture of the Middle Ages and how it related to the art in these kinds of books. I almost want to watch that video again.
Key concept from More Human Than Human: Humans don't really like realism in their artwork; they want exaggerated perfection. What constitutes this has changed throughout time/history, but trend continues into modern media today.
Key concept from Art & Life in the Middle Ages: the Luttrell Psalter. The whole video shows the illustrations in the Psalter. Shows not only illustrations of the Biblical stories contained within, but also has strange depictions of everyday life and some depictions of saintly stories.
The first video related to the readings in the text by delving into a specific feature of ancient art - while the book covered more general themes. The video specifically looked at how the human form was depicted in different cultures throughout ancient times, and explored the reason behind the specific exaggerations that were often depicted. The second video really delved into what the drawings in an illuminated manuscript represented - what stories they told, what symbols they contained, etc. The book makes only a passing mention on illuminated manuscripts in its section on the Early Middle Ages, but that's maybe one of the most fascinating things from the Middle Ages. I have a fondness for the beauty of illuminated manuscripts.
I pretty much explained how the videos added depth to the text I was already reading - that's how it relates, is to add depth in the first place. But I really liked these videos. They were less dry and had more interesting subject matter than many of the others I've been made to watch. The narration for the first video was interesting and engaging and I enjoyed the exploration of the development of the human figure in ancient art. While the narrator for the second video was a little dry, I was absolutely fascinated by the art that was shown - I loved getting to see it close up - and I learned a lot about the culture of the Middle Ages and how it related to the art in these kinds of books. I almost want to watch that video again.
Saturday, October 8, 2016
Peer Reviews
The first blog I was supposed to review did not have a post for either project 1 or 2.
The second blog had a posting for project 1, but not project 2. So I did leave a comment on project 1 - the elements & principles slideshow.
The blog is Sharntell Moran's: https://sharntell-tnfa.blogspot.com/
Her Elements & Principle's Slideshow was amazing. I felt like for most of her pictures, I understood exactly what image she was trying to convey, and I agreed wholeheartedly with those images. They were perfect. For the images I was less sure of - mostly because they were unlabeled, but not all - I could see a couple of different principles/elements. There's one unlabeled one that looks like it could be either line or contrast, depending on what you're looking at.
The other blog I reviewed for project 1 was Megan Newton's: https://artinquiryreflections.blogspot.com/
Her Elements & Principles slideshow was good, though maybe not quite as impressive as Sharntell's. For some of her pictures, I wholeheartedly agree with what she was going with. They're fantastic pictures for illustrating particular elements/principles. For other pictures, I could see where she was going with the idea but I didn't necessarily think her picture depicted that well. I'm not sure I saw a different element/principle in the work, just that I might have picked something different to what she was trying to show.
The first blog I could review for project 2 - the art gallery visit - was Haley Laskowski's: http://haleysartforthemind.blogspot.com/
She picked some nice works, though none of them were the same as my own. She seemed drawn to more modern/recent works - everything she picked was created in the 20th or 21st centuries, while I like older works of art.
Megan also did project 2 so I reviewed her blog too.
She and I did have one piece of work in common - we both felt drawn to that Niagara painting, and we generally had the same reason: we live in the Buffalo-Niagara region and care about what happens here.
I have to say that Haley picked a piece of artwork I sort of missed somehow in my visit. Nancy Dwyer's Kill Yourself piece is quite interesting and I agree that I want to know way more about it. Especially since it was done in 1989 so it would make it difficult (but no less relevant) to say that it "came out of" internet culture because the internet was not such a big thing in 1989.
To be honest, I feel like my peers need to learn to talk about their processes a little more. They're reflections are very short and reserved and don't really give me much to go on in terms of analyzing an opinion and forming a response. As you can see, I do not lack for words, or the courage to use them. I wish they would speak up more.
Also evidenced by the fact that I have no comments on my own blog, so I can neither agree or disagree with what they have to say about my processes/reflections.
The second blog had a posting for project 1, but not project 2. So I did leave a comment on project 1 - the elements & principles slideshow.
The blog is Sharntell Moran's: https://sharntell-tnfa.blogspot.com/
Her Elements & Principle's Slideshow was amazing. I felt like for most of her pictures, I understood exactly what image she was trying to convey, and I agreed wholeheartedly with those images. They were perfect. For the images I was less sure of - mostly because they were unlabeled, but not all - I could see a couple of different principles/elements. There's one unlabeled one that looks like it could be either line or contrast, depending on what you're looking at.
The other blog I reviewed for project 1 was Megan Newton's: https://artinquiryreflections.blogspot.com/
Her Elements & Principles slideshow was good, though maybe not quite as impressive as Sharntell's. For some of her pictures, I wholeheartedly agree with what she was going with. They're fantastic pictures for illustrating particular elements/principles. For other pictures, I could see where she was going with the idea but I didn't necessarily think her picture depicted that well. I'm not sure I saw a different element/principle in the work, just that I might have picked something different to what she was trying to show.
The first blog I could review for project 2 - the art gallery visit - was Haley Laskowski's: http://haleysartforthemind.blogspot.com/
She picked some nice works, though none of them were the same as my own. She seemed drawn to more modern/recent works - everything she picked was created in the 20th or 21st centuries, while I like older works of art.
Megan also did project 2 so I reviewed her blog too.
She and I did have one piece of work in common - we both felt drawn to that Niagara painting, and we generally had the same reason: we live in the Buffalo-Niagara region and care about what happens here.
I have to say that Haley picked a piece of artwork I sort of missed somehow in my visit. Nancy Dwyer's Kill Yourself piece is quite interesting and I agree that I want to know way more about it. Especially since it was done in 1989 so it would make it difficult (but no less relevant) to say that it "came out of" internet culture because the internet was not such a big thing in 1989.
To be honest, I feel like my peers need to learn to talk about their processes a little more. They're reflections are very short and reserved and don't really give me much to go on in terms of analyzing an opinion and forming a response. As you can see, I do not lack for words, or the courage to use them. I wish they would speak up more.
Also evidenced by the fact that I have no comments on my own blog, so I can neither agree or disagree with what they have to say about my processes/reflections.
Sunday, October 2, 2016
MY Logo
These are the images of my logo:
My very first idea when thinking about a personal logo was something to do with butterflies. I've had a thing for butterflies/fairies since I was in grade school. So I started with a butterfly and thought maybe about doing my name in the design of the butterfly's wings. I dismissed that idea pretty quickly; I thought it was too detailed, I don't have that kind of artistic skill, and it just didn't feel right.
So instead, I went with the online moniker I've been using for a while now: crabbybun. I created this as a combination of my Western & Chinese zodiacs - I am a Cancer (the crab) in the West, and I was born in the Year of the Rabbit for the Chinese. I briefly thought about somehow combining the crab and the rabbit but that looked scary in my mind so I decided against it. I began working with somehow putting the "c" and "b" from the two parts of my name into an animal. I'm not fond of the crab, but I do like bunnies an awful lot. So I have a good many sketches trying that out.
As you can tell, I couldn't quite get it right. I just couldn't make the letters look good in the bunny. Then I thought about something I've been trying to do for a while. See, I have the symbol for my zodiac (essentially a sideways 69) tattooed on my right wrist. I've been toying with the idea for a couple of years now of embellishing this tattoo, since it's pretty simple and done just in black. I've been thinking about getting little bunny details tattooed in black around my zodiac, to represent the crabbybun idea. I've been waiting to see how a tattoo artist would do it, because I'm not talented enough to really do what I want. But I decided to try my own version of it as my logo.
Took me a couple tries, but I figured out how I wanted it to look as a logo. It's simple, and easy enough to shrink down. It could certainly just be black & white, with stark outlines, but color was asked for. So I did the zodiac sign part of it with a gradient of water colors - aqua green into blue - because Cancer the Crab is a water sign. I outlined it with a sparkly gel pen, doing a circular pattern partly because it looked like ripples and partly because the pen worked better that way. I picked a sparkly gel pen because the glitter looks like light glistening on water. For the bunny part, I picked my favorite color - pink - and did those parts in shades of pink. I picked a pale pink for the body, and a darker pink for the ear/nose. I outlined this in pink glitter gel pen as well, because pink is pretty and glitter makes everything better.
I guess the most important thing I realized while making this logo is that letters are not really necessary for a logo. I automatically wanted to put lettering into the logo, thinking that it was important but the more I thought about it, I realized that a lot of really famous logos don't have letters at all - like Nike, that swoosh alone tells you what the product is. You don't need the name at all.
The videos were good. I think the Marmite one might be better than the other one. That one was actually interesting, because I've tried Marmite and I really don't know why the English eat that stuff. I knew that it was popular, but I never thought of it needing to change or "rebrand." The idea of a squeezable bottle was good - not original, but necessary - but I understood afterward how necessary a brand update can be for a product.
Friday, September 30, 2016
Art Gallery Visit #1
The artwork that left the strongest impression on me was
Bridget Riley’s Drift No. 2 (acrylic
on canvas, 1966).
What I was
particularly impressed with was how the lines were drawn not just so that they
implied movement, but really felt like they did move. Drift felt
exactly like being in water to me, and looking at the painting straight on gave
the feeling and illusion of ripples and waves.
Depending on how I moved my head, the painting seemed to really move.
There were a lot of works that left an impression on me. One of the other favorites was James Ensor’s Le feu d’artifice (Fireworks)
(oil/encaustic on canvas, 1887).
The
bold splash of warm colors right in the middle is evocative of a volcano
erupting, until you see all the people painted in at the bottom. This painting really does evoke watching
fireworks erupt in the sky. You can
almost hear the boom!
To be honest, the first artwork I sought out was
Monet’s. Currently, the Albright-Knox
has his Chemin de halage a Argenteuil
(Townpath at Argenteuil, Winter) (oil on canvas, 1875-76) on display.
While not my favorite Monet, I feel a great
connection with him as a painter and with Impressionism in general (and to some
extent Post-Impressionism). I love the
style, the way they work with color – this painting in particular is a good
example of this. Winter is a dull &
grey time of year, but those are not the colors most evident in Monet’s
painting. You can see all the greens and
purples, all the ways he added color which did not detract from the season he
was depicting yet still gives us the same gloomy cold feeling.
The other artwork I felt a big connection
with was Frank M. Moore’s Niagara (oil
on canvas, 1994-95).
Firstly, because
this is my home, and I just visited the Falls for my birthday so this painting
is a stunningly beautiful tribute to that.
I really enjoyed too how he got very into the water theme – the copper
pipe frame with faucet handles was poignant and the chemical strings of
dihydrogen monoxide buried all in the water was fascinating to look at.
The first artwork I wanted to learn more about was a
sculpture (plaster, paint & wood) by Alexander Archipenko called Walking Soldier (1917).
Like, I got the image of a walking soldier
looking at it but I need to know more.
Who is this soldier? Was this
artist a witness to the horrors of WWI?
I thought most of the fighting for that was done in like Germany and
France. Was the artist in one of those
cities at the time? Was he a soldier in
the war?
The second artwork I wanted to know more about was Frantisek Kupka’s Traits, Plans, Profonduer (oil on canvas, 1920-22).
It’s a very blue piece, almost like someone emerging from a constricting garment (there’s what seems like a boot in the lower right of the painting) – actually I more thought of someone’s sadness emerging from themselves after a long day of holding it together. Yet the title (the artist was Czechian) evokes the old movie Planes, Trains, and Automobiles and in some ways the looping, snake-like blue lines could be a train of some sort. So yeah, I want to know about this painting – what it was supposed to be/about, the style it was done in, and more.
The second artwork I wanted to know more about was Frantisek Kupka’s Traits, Plans, Profonduer (oil on canvas, 1920-22).
It’s a very blue piece, almost like someone emerging from a constricting garment (there’s what seems like a boot in the lower right of the painting) – actually I more thought of someone’s sadness emerging from themselves after a long day of holding it together. Yet the title (the artist was Czechian) evokes the old movie Planes, Trains, and Automobiles and in some ways the looping, snake-like blue lines could be a train of some sort. So yeah, I want to know about this painting – what it was supposed to be/about, the style it was done in, and more.
Sunday, September 25, 2016
Values & the Color Wheel
My images can be found at the Photobucket album below:
http://s350.photobucket.com/user/amynewt87/library/Values%20and%20the%20Color%20Wheel
1. The color wheel was relatively easy to make. But the value scale was really, really hard. I found it quite difficult to control how hard I pressed with the pencil and things like that. It took much longer to do my scale then my color wheel, but I found the color wheel more fun.
2. I enjoyed working with the paints far more. It's much easier to apply and to mix then trying to get the pencil to grade. Painting is relaxing!
3. Well I suppose the most important "discovery" was just how hard it was to make a grey gradient with just one pencil. It looks relatively easy, and I suppose if you use different/multiple pencils then it is easier. But with just one pencil it was very, very difficult for me.
4. I suppose the most important information I got from the videos was that the primary colors for painting were "wrong." Like, I knew about yellow/magenta/cyan for printer primary colors, but I didn't know it had transferred to painting. Or that the secondary colors were now green/red/blue, instead of green/orange/purple. I want purple/violet to be a secondary color again.
http://s350.photobucket.com/user/amynewt87/library/Values%20and%20the%20Color%20Wheel
1. The color wheel was relatively easy to make. But the value scale was really, really hard. I found it quite difficult to control how hard I pressed with the pencil and things like that. It took much longer to do my scale then my color wheel, but I found the color wheel more fun.
2. I enjoyed working with the paints far more. It's much easier to apply and to mix then trying to get the pencil to grade. Painting is relaxing!
3. Well I suppose the most important "discovery" was just how hard it was to make a grey gradient with just one pencil. It looks relatively easy, and I suppose if you use different/multiple pencils then it is easier. But with just one pencil it was very, very difficult for me.
4. I suppose the most important information I got from the videos was that the primary colors for painting were "wrong." Like, I knew about yellow/magenta/cyan for printer primary colors, but I didn't know it had transferred to painting. Or that the secondary colors were now green/red/blue, instead of green/orange/purple. I want purple/violet to be a secondary color again.
Sunday, September 18, 2016
Elements & Principles of Design - Subway Series
The link below is my Photobucket album submission for the elements & principles of design project:
Elements & Principles of Design - Subway Series
I decided that I was going to have conceptual unity in my work by doing all of the photos at the Subway sandwich shop I work with. This came because of a pun - they do call me a "sandwich artist" after all.
"Space" is the lobby of my restaurant. The most important part of a restaurant, and the part that requires the most space, is the lobby. I figured it would be an appropriate picture.
"Unity" was not just a conceptual concept. To literally represent it, I took a photo of a complete sub - all the ingredients unified into a coherent whole.
"Pattern" was constructed using sandwich materials. Many of my subs require patterning of some sort so I thought using the food to create a pattern would be clever.
"Proportion" was a little difficult, but I finally decided I was going to show proportion via a salad. I over-portioned part of it to make the theme of the picture more obvious.
"Value" is shown by a bread gradient. There are various shades of lightness & darkness that can be found in Subway bread, and I illustrated it by putting them side by side and allowing optical mixing to show a gradient.
"Texture" is a close-up photo - in this case of green peppers, but lettuce and tuna were thought about. A close-up of this nature allows you to see the different textures present in the vegetable, and also makes the composition seem like texture in and of itself.
"Shapes" is the employee bulletin board, cobbled together entirely of squares. While it is not very varied in shape, it is a good example of flat, 2-dimensional shape.
"Contrast" is supposed to be showing one full and one empty sauce bottle, with the contrast being between full and empty. The more I think about it, the better I could have done with this one; it is probably the one photo I could retake, because I could add contrasting color as well and show what I wanted even more.
"Forms" is a set-up of the recyclable boxes right before they went to the dumpster. Again, there isn't much variety in form where I work, but I thought that the set up showed 3-dimensional form very well.
"Balance" is another sort of a pun. I set up the food scale - a balance of itself - on the central axis and symmetrically balanced the rest of the objects around it.
"Emphasis" was a picture of one of my chip racks. In particular, it is supposed to show the big thing we get for promotional chips. Promotion is a kind of emphasis of itself - another pun on my part - and the holder we get for those chips certainly helped to emphasize them in the photo.
"Movement" was originally going to be of a busy stream of customers, but my shop was rather quiet over the weekend (also why there were no people in my lobby picture). So instead, to represent movement, I took a photo of my mop bucket being filled. I could photograph both the water flowing out of the faucet, but also the movement of the water in the bucket.
"Line" my be my favorite, as it was one of the thoughts that set up my theme. The photo is one of my "line" - what we call the area we work out of when making subs. It really contains all the essential elements of "line" - it's called a line, it's set up in a way that a work will move down it in a straight line, it's made up almost entirely of lines... I took the photo at somewhat of an angle because diagonal lines are dynamic and make one think of movement.
"Color" was one of the easiest. The picture is of my large chip rack, because when I think of color in a Subway, nothing pops like the myriad of colors present in a chip rack.
Elements & Principles of Design - Subway Series
I decided that I was going to have conceptual unity in my work by doing all of the photos at the Subway sandwich shop I work with. This came because of a pun - they do call me a "sandwich artist" after all.
"Space" is the lobby of my restaurant. The most important part of a restaurant, and the part that requires the most space, is the lobby. I figured it would be an appropriate picture.
"Unity" was not just a conceptual concept. To literally represent it, I took a photo of a complete sub - all the ingredients unified into a coherent whole.
"Pattern" was constructed using sandwich materials. Many of my subs require patterning of some sort so I thought using the food to create a pattern would be clever.
"Proportion" was a little difficult, but I finally decided I was going to show proportion via a salad. I over-portioned part of it to make the theme of the picture more obvious.
"Value" is shown by a bread gradient. There are various shades of lightness & darkness that can be found in Subway bread, and I illustrated it by putting them side by side and allowing optical mixing to show a gradient.
"Texture" is a close-up photo - in this case of green peppers, but lettuce and tuna were thought about. A close-up of this nature allows you to see the different textures present in the vegetable, and also makes the composition seem like texture in and of itself.
"Shapes" is the employee bulletin board, cobbled together entirely of squares. While it is not very varied in shape, it is a good example of flat, 2-dimensional shape.
"Contrast" is supposed to be showing one full and one empty sauce bottle, with the contrast being between full and empty. The more I think about it, the better I could have done with this one; it is probably the one photo I could retake, because I could add contrasting color as well and show what I wanted even more.
"Forms" is a set-up of the recyclable boxes right before they went to the dumpster. Again, there isn't much variety in form where I work, but I thought that the set up showed 3-dimensional form very well.
"Balance" is another sort of a pun. I set up the food scale - a balance of itself - on the central axis and symmetrically balanced the rest of the objects around it.
"Emphasis" was a picture of one of my chip racks. In particular, it is supposed to show the big thing we get for promotional chips. Promotion is a kind of emphasis of itself - another pun on my part - and the holder we get for those chips certainly helped to emphasize them in the photo.
"Movement" was originally going to be of a busy stream of customers, but my shop was rather quiet over the weekend (also why there were no people in my lobby picture). So instead, to represent movement, I took a photo of my mop bucket being filled. I could photograph both the water flowing out of the faucet, but also the movement of the water in the bucket.
"Line" my be my favorite, as it was one of the thoughts that set up my theme. The photo is one of my "line" - what we call the area we work out of when making subs. It really contains all the essential elements of "line" - it's called a line, it's set up in a way that a work will move down it in a straight line, it's made up almost entirely of lines... I took the photo at somewhat of an angle because diagonal lines are dynamic and make one think of movement.
"Color" was one of the easiest. The picture is of my large chip rack, because when I think of color in a Subway, nothing pops like the myriad of colors present in a chip rack.
Saturday, September 17, 2016
Color & Emotion
1. Color impacts our emotions
personally, sometimes in a very intense way.
Some colors are even associated with certain emotions, like how we
associate blue with both water and sadness.
Some of these associations are universal, but a large number of them are
culturally/socially conditioned. Blue is
a good example: its association with water is also an association with freedom,
and while sadness is also an emotion connected with blue, in India it is a
color associated with the gods Vishnu & Kali. Emotions are influenced by the value and
intensity of the color, with darker/more intense colors eliciting stronger
emotions. Color combinations can create
and influence emotions. Contrasting
colors, like those found in Van Gogh’s café The
Night Café, can serve to create tension for us. Complimentary colors can serve to increase
the intensity of the colors used and therefore deepen/strengthen the emotions
the painting elicits in us.
2. The most intriguing color theories
are the ones surrounding the optical tricks colors can play on us. I particularly enjoy the afterimage trick –
tiring out the color receptors in the eye/brain and imprinting images in them
is kind of cool to me. I am a very big
fan of the Impressionists – and Monet is my favorite visual artist – so I found
it intriguing the way they used this visual trick to create shadows. I particularly think of Monet’s Haystacks series because he painted
haystacks at different seasons of the year and the winter painting is almost
the afterimage of the summer painting.
3. The biggest impact on the
connection between emotion and art in the Color video came from watching the
painter – Rebecca – create her piece near the end. I was struck by how she worked so hard to
adjust the color so that it would invoke the emotion she was keeping in her
mind of the place she was painting. She
could tell by looking at it that the emotions weren’t matching up right, so the
audience wouldn’t get it either, but when it clicked she was so positive that
it was the right emotion and that other people would get it.
4. The Feelings video didn’t really
talk about color per se; it was mostly about how art is tied into the events of
history, the related emotions, and how those emotions have been manifested in
art since Medieval times. However, you can
see in some of the paintings the narrator points out how color was used to
invoke emotion. I’m thinking
particularly about one of the works of Jacques-Louis David – Oath of the Horatii. I could see how the use of red in the robes
of the main personage, along with the long & straight lines used to make
him, could evoke strong feelings about his masculinity. The color would be important because it makes
the figure appear larger and advancing, which would help to focus us and imply
the emotional message the artist intended.
Monday, September 12, 2016
A Scientific Look at Aesthetics
1. Key concept of the CNN Article: how our brain recognizes art. The whole article is an exploration in the way the brain processes art as coherent concepts. For instance, lines don’t exist in the real world, but lines alone in artwork can still be recognized by our brains as coherent forms - shapes, faces, etc. Our brains do this because of light and shadow in the real world that the lines mimic enough for us to get the idea. It talks about the different ways our brain recognizes faces and how art can mimic that with just color differences. The last part of the article talks about why we like art and it comes down to the same reasons we like anything as humans - it makes the pleasure center in our brains fire off. So even abstract art - art that is not necessarily a coherent idea or form - can still cause a pleasurable reaction in the brain that allows us to draw meaning from the piece.
Key concept of the Philosophy video: the history and evolution of aesthetics as a branch of philosophy. The video went through different philosophers throughout history, starting with the Ancient Greeks & Plato. It explored aesthetic theory through different lenses: not just philosophers but novelists and other artists.
Key concept of the Neurobiology video: same as the CNN article - how our brain recognizes art. This video goes a bit deeper than the CNN article, starting from the beginnings of art history - cave paintings and making tools. It attempts to use what we know in the fields of neurobiology and neurology to explain how humans were able to create in the first place, and why we recognize certain themes as universal despite time context.
2. I really like Kant’s aesthetic theory. Kant was the philosopher in the 18th century who first proposed a perception of human experience that tried to reconcile the reason-oriented rationalists and the sensory-oriented empiricists, creating aesthetics as a comprehensive philosophical system.
I think Kant’s theory of aesthetics is important firstly because he tied aesthetics to his theories of reason and human experience. He made connections not just to our emotional reactivity - a sensory reaction studied by the empiricists - but to our judgement and reasoning. Aesthetics are a subjective response to how the artwork pleases our imaginations. We feel as if our judgements on aesthetics are logical and we appear to use reason when justifying beauty, however. This paradox is because aesthetics invokes a disinterested pleasure in us and this pleasure has universal validity - this is a concept of common sense, a reasoning concept used in conjunction with our emotional reactivity upon seeing art in the first place.
Secondly, he makes a distinction between different elements of the aesthetic. Kant made a distinction between beauty, which we can point to, and the sublime, which we can appreciate aesthetically - that is, emotionally/subjectively - but that isn’t as easily defined; it’s a fuzzy relationship between our reasoning faculties (engaged when studying art) and our imagination that the sublime draws on.
3. The scientific views of aesthetics and art as shown in the Neurobiology video are quite interesting to me as they explore evidence that our psychological processes have a physical basis and that those physical traits influence psychological processes.
The most interesting fact from the first speaker’s lecture (Changeux?) was about how art evokes emotion in us, making us aware of certain things. He showed brain scans that were lit up in the sections related to empathy when viewing art with tragic themes and it was cool to see that art can actually make the brain react like that - these themes aren’t just abstract concepts; they have a real physical basis.
The second speaker (Ramachandram) was more engaging and I was more interested in what he said. I particularly liked how he connected certain art styles and themes across cultures and times. He was talking about how Picasso chose to exaggerate certain things in his paintings and to take away the realism and how it was similar to Indian painters and sculptors and how they exaggerated reality and why they would do that aesthetically. I also enjoyed how he talked about visual aesthetics instead of art because the word “art” has all these connotations to money and mass production and things that don’t really have anything to do with what we’re talking about.
4. The videos and article didn’t do much for me except connect the text to my chosen major. For instance, I’ve studied Immanuel Kant in a couple of different courses by now, though never quite his aesthetic philosophy. So I have a basis in which to understand Kant to begin with, the same with Plato. The article especially was fun, because I’ve studied perception since PSY 101 - every psychology student has to understand the basics of perception (and the basics of the brain in general) before being able to understand anything else. Now, connecting the text back to the subject I’ve been studying the most/hardest does make some of the concepts easier to understand. It’s almost as if you have to psycholanalyze the works of art that you look at because it plays into the work almost as much as technical art theory does.
5. My opinion of the article is a pretty positive one. I thought it was a very well-written work that connected art back to neuropsychology in a simple, yet interesting way. My prior coursework allowed me to understand the connections the article was making easily and the text gave me enough background on the art side to allow the article to make some concepts clearer.
The philosophy of the arts video was almost as bad as listening to Karuza teaching History and Systems. Don’t get me wrong, I love Karuza as a teacher, but he drones in his lectures and they can be a little dry and boring. I literally felt like I was sitting in that class again, since although the philosophy is different (aesthetic philosophy), the method of delivery for the video was nearly exactly the same. That was painful; not interesting or fun and it didn’t really expand my understanding of aesthetics any better.
The CARTA video was a little more interesting, or at least the material was. It was difficult to listen to the first speaker; he was heavily accented in a way that made his speech difficult to follow. However, it was interesting to go back in history and to use neurobiology to explain our creation of art, what we are drawn to when we create and why we recognize certain themes universally. The second speaker was more engaging. He was funnier, though he spoke quite quickly and I almost found it difficult to keep up after struggling to decipher the first speaker. He related the science back to real life in a way that was easily understood and engaging to listen to.
Tuesday, September 6, 2016
Introducing...Me!
The process for setting this blog up was fairly easy, but that might be due to the fact that I spend a majority of my time online. I have a couple different gmail accounts to begin with - one for school, one for my phone, and one I got when YouTube became Google+. I'm also no stranger to blogging. Aside from my social media accounts (two I use regularly), I have three actual blogs that I frequently post to, though I prefer using WordPress as a blogging platform to this one.
This blog is for an art course, so I expect to maybe learn a little art theory in this course, because I'm not well-versed on things like "principles of composition." However, I actively review the media I read/watch/play as a writing exercise in my downtime, and I have a 16 page document filled with titles to review. I've written about 10 or so that I haven't posted, and I think I've done at least 20 different movie reviews alone! In that respect, I have a critical framework for examining art and am well-versed in judging and discussion, not to mention that critical thinking is essential for psychology majors. Every paper I write for a course has me critically examining scientific research. It's become hard to read watered-down reports in the news because I have too many questions and the media tends to skew research. Much of my expectation for this course is to stretch my creativity and have a little fun - it is art after all, and the projects excite me a little bit. For me, though, this course doesn't rank as important as some of my others so I'm not really expecting a lot to begin with.
Online courses are great. They're very flexible to a busy college student working and taking class full-time. Every other online course I've been in has been easy and relatively enjoyable. I find that online courses can be more diverse in how they present information, and that sometimes that makes learning the information easier or more fun. I also find that online courses take some of the social anxiety and pressure out of the classroom setting and furthering discussion more naturally. This works so long as there are no stupid rules about the amount of posting you do. I had a professor once who wanted so many responses (like, 15-20 each week) that many responses lacked any quality because students were struggling to meet the high quota - it seemed like he didn't care about what you actually thought and was more concerned that you were coming online every single day. Most professors, however, seem to judge quality over quantity and I've had fantastic discussions with people on various topics because of the Discussion Board option an online course gives. I think with the slight anonymity that comes with an online course, people are more likely to really truly express what they think/how they feel and it enhances the discussion.
But to be honest, those "Growth Mindset" videos are actually really soul-crushing to me. They were super, super hard to listen to.
I found that there's not much here that applies to me, as I am a senior working on her last semester as an undergraduate, while the videos seem very much directed to first-semester freshmen.
They talk about skills that I needed to develop earlier than this - as a Psych major, there are several required courses that would have been even more difficult to pass if I didn't have certain study skills - time management, taking courses seriously, etc.
Also, as a Psychology major all I do is study the brain. I want to go into counseling, using Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy. Essentially, that's all these videos are discussing; the whole concept of CBT is "change your thinking, change your life." For laypeople, CBT is the therapy Dr. Phil uses.
I did relate to the money issue though - I didn't start college until the age of 25 because financial aid would not cover me before then and I don't want student loan debt (on that note, I have made it all this way without taking out one single loan!) In order to save money, I've gotten 90% of my books as digital copies - I've maybe bought 2 actual physical textbooks in the past 4/5 years.
In fact, starting college at the age of 25 made a lot of stuff easier, as age made me less self-conscious about how people think about me. I was also more serious going back at that age - I cared less about "making friends" or "fitting in" because I live close and have friends already. Those things ceased to be a priority, and my coursework became my sole focus. I fully believe this is what allowed me to make it through my entire college undergraduate work with no less than a 3.0 GPA overall, and a 3.5 major GPA - which got me invited to join Psy Chi, the honor society of psych majors.
This blog is for an art course, so I expect to maybe learn a little art theory in this course, because I'm not well-versed on things like "principles of composition." However, I actively review the media I read/watch/play as a writing exercise in my downtime, and I have a 16 page document filled with titles to review. I've written about 10 or so that I haven't posted, and I think I've done at least 20 different movie reviews alone! In that respect, I have a critical framework for examining art and am well-versed in judging and discussion, not to mention that critical thinking is essential for psychology majors. Every paper I write for a course has me critically examining scientific research. It's become hard to read watered-down reports in the news because I have too many questions and the media tends to skew research. Much of my expectation for this course is to stretch my creativity and have a little fun - it is art after all, and the projects excite me a little bit. For me, though, this course doesn't rank as important as some of my others so I'm not really expecting a lot to begin with.
Online courses are great. They're very flexible to a busy college student working and taking class full-time. Every other online course I've been in has been easy and relatively enjoyable. I find that online courses can be more diverse in how they present information, and that sometimes that makes learning the information easier or more fun. I also find that online courses take some of the social anxiety and pressure out of the classroom setting and furthering discussion more naturally. This works so long as there are no stupid rules about the amount of posting you do. I had a professor once who wanted so many responses (like, 15-20 each week) that many responses lacked any quality because students were struggling to meet the high quota - it seemed like he didn't care about what you actually thought and was more concerned that you were coming online every single day. Most professors, however, seem to judge quality over quantity and I've had fantastic discussions with people on various topics because of the Discussion Board option an online course gives. I think with the slight anonymity that comes with an online course, people are more likely to really truly express what they think/how they feel and it enhances the discussion.
But to be honest, those "Growth Mindset" videos are actually really soul-crushing to me. They were super, super hard to listen to.
I found that there's not much here that applies to me, as I am a senior working on her last semester as an undergraduate, while the videos seem very much directed to first-semester freshmen.
They talk about skills that I needed to develop earlier than this - as a Psych major, there are several required courses that would have been even more difficult to pass if I didn't have certain study skills - time management, taking courses seriously, etc.
Also, as a Psychology major all I do is study the brain. I want to go into counseling, using Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy. Essentially, that's all these videos are discussing; the whole concept of CBT is "change your thinking, change your life." For laypeople, CBT is the therapy Dr. Phil uses.
I did relate to the money issue though - I didn't start college until the age of 25 because financial aid would not cover me before then and I don't want student loan debt (on that note, I have made it all this way without taking out one single loan!) In order to save money, I've gotten 90% of my books as digital copies - I've maybe bought 2 actual physical textbooks in the past 4/5 years.
In fact, starting college at the age of 25 made a lot of stuff easier, as age made me less self-conscious about how people think about me. I was also more serious going back at that age - I cared less about "making friends" or "fitting in" because I live close and have friends already. Those things ceased to be a priority, and my coursework became my sole focus. I fully believe this is what allowed me to make it through my entire college undergraduate work with no less than a 3.0 GPA overall, and a 3.5 major GPA - which got me invited to join Psy Chi, the honor society of psych majors.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)