tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-88199591981946341582024-03-13T03:13:47.860-07:00andrzejandrzejhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01283273918462257425noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8819959198194634158.post-34076898734446283622010-03-16T04:40:00.000-07:002010-03-16T05:32:09.905-07:00Invocation of My Demon Brother (1969)<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_rMv4p1KILVk/S59v1-uiiuI/AAAAAAAAAEI/TqODnQ59FJg/s1600-h/3000051459m.jpeg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 328px;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_rMv4p1KILVk/S59v1-uiiuI/AAAAAAAAAEI/TqODnQ59FJg/s400/3000051459m.jpeg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5449197047303539426" /></a><br /><div>18th February 2010</div><div><br /></div><div>Spr<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">ü</span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">th Magers Berlin London</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">"Kenneth Anger was born in Santa Monica, California. His most iconic works include the classic </span></span><i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Fireworks</span></span></i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"> (1947), </span></span><i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Eaux D'Artifice</span></span></i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"> (1953), </span></span><i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Rabbit's Moon</span></span></i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"> (1950-1973), </span></span><i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Inauguation of the Please Dome</span></span></i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"> (1954-1966), </span></span><i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Scorpio Rising</span></span></i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"> (1964), </span></span><i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Invocation of My Demon Brother </span></span></i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">(1969) and </span></span><i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Lucifer Rising </span></span></i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">(1970-1981). His work has been featured at the Whitney Biennial 2006, P.S.</span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">1</span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"> </span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Contemporary Art Centre, New York in 2009 and the Athens Biennial 2009.</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">He lives and works in Los Angeles."</span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">1</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Anger's work strongly reflects on the Xenophobic attitudes of the 1960's. For example within </span></span><i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Scorpio Rising</span></span></i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">, Anger uses heavily embedded imagery consisting of Nazis, Jesus, eroticism and Sunday Comics. This Juxtaposition of imagery seems to hold some essence of distaste within modern culture, however to understand the effects of Anger's films you have to imagine how his films would have been received in the early 60's.</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Anger's lack of narrative combined with frustratingly muddled soundtracks cause an element of hyper reality where the viewer can't enter the video (the key purpose of majority of cinema) but is in fact submerged in angers alternate reality where good and evil assimilate. Provoking the viewer to question the culture they have been fed.</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Paul McArthur and Carolee Schneeman also comment on taboo subjects within the 60's with works such as </span></span><i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Projection Room </span></span></i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">(1971-2006) and </span></span><i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Meat Joy </span></span></i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">(1964) respectively. However with regard to Anger's videos they do not strike the same level of disgust and aversion because of because of Anger's adjacency of accepted and non accepted cultural references sparks a greater sense of unsettling within the viewer. In a way that is horrifically far away from being a satirical reference.</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:medium;"><br /></span></div>andrzejhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01283273918462257425noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8819959198194634158.post-18251683906947927522010-01-29T16:13:00.000-08:002010-01-31T10:48:44.426-08:00out of context.'A bird's wing, comrades,' he said, 'is an organ of propulsion and not of manipulation. It should therefore be regarded as a leg. The distinguishing mark of Man is the <i>hand, </i>the instrument with which he does all his mischief.'<div><br /></div><div>George Orwell </div>andrzejhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01283273918462257425noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8819959198194634158.post-13257121028254683352010-01-26T09:47:00.000-08:002010-01-30T03:51:37.400-08:00Archie's Critique<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_rMv4p1KILVk/S18sTOyftxI/AAAAAAAAAD4/9csrej3ypYQ/s1600-h/a+and+b.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 320px; height: 134px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_rMv4p1KILVk/S18sTOyftxI/AAAAAAAAAD4/9csrej3ypYQ/s320/a+and+b.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5431108384531134226" /></a><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'lucida grande';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:x-small;">For the purpose of this writing the paintings will be named "A" and "B" respectively from left to right.</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'lucida grande';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'lucida grande';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">Fundamental responses from the contrasting forms of presentations, forced a conversation to develop. Not just from the viewers, but from the pieces of art themselves.</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'lucida grande';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'lucida grande';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">Looking at the images in a basic aesthetic sense, work A has the appearance of an ethereal dream deriving from an android. The </span></span><i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'lucida grande';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">pixel-esque</span></span></i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'lucida grande';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"> nature of this piece also brought thoughts of technology and digitalisation of images. Be they conscious or not. </span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'lucida grande';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">Work B, holds a sense of nature, due to the use of wood as the applied medium and the softer dispersion of the face (when compared to work B). However all of the above points, could in some respect be thought of as arbitrary 'over-reading', an ability that becomes increasingly hard to escape.Thus causing viewers to possibly miss the intended language which was intended to be read.</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'lucida grande';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'lucida grande';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">Soon the pieces of art, were then deconstructed with instantaneous impressions, where questions such as 'what is actually infront of us?' were asked. Conclusions soon arose that the paintings were portraits that have been produced via studying photos. As well as the argument between presentation, the concept of style of painting appeared. </span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'lucida grande';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'lucida grande';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">Why is that red square so compelling to the viewer?</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'lucida grande';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">Abstract or figurative?</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'lucida grande';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">Why are portraits created?</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'lucida grande';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'lucida grande';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">These questions were soon studied, and resulted in a perfect retrospective of institution taught theories and concepts. This coupled with the previous comparison of presentation; the ideas of wood being the initial foundation for which paintings were to be applied with the use of poplar (pre-renaissance), then canvas trumping it's previous medium and the backwards thought of 'good quality painting should be on a canvas'. </span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'lucida grande';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'lucida grande';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">Resulting in the conclusion of the critique. A discussion/argument/study of 'art schools'?</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:'lucida grande';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;"><br /></span></div>andrzejhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01283273918462257425noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8819959198194634158.post-52654402732808331932010-01-22T09:59:00.000-08:002010-01-22T15:31:31.694-08:00possible invitation for Xuma show<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_rMv4p1KILVk/S1oiyXoBA0I/AAAAAAAAADI/LnxakFrvZAc/s1600-h/Screen+shot+2010-01-22+at+21.43.56.png"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 272px;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_rMv4p1KILVk/S1oiyXoBA0I/AAAAAAAAADI/LnxakFrvZAc/s400/Screen+shot+2010-01-22+at+21.43.56.png" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5429690549479211842" /></a><br /><br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_rMv4p1KILVk/S1oQO6GfYdI/AAAAAAAAADA/PQuBFFycw1M/s1600-h/Screen+shot+2010-01-22+at+20.51.59.png"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 286px;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_rMv4p1KILVk/S1oQO6GfYdI/AAAAAAAAADA/PQuBFFycw1M/s400/Screen+shot+2010-01-22+at+20.51.59.png" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5429670149049246162" /></a><br /><br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_rMv4p1KILVk/S1nn3juF_eI/AAAAAAAAACw/b1xwtcTSGyg/s1600-h/Screen+shot+2010-01-22+at+18.00.32.png"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 271px;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_rMv4p1KILVk/S1nn3juF_eI/AAAAAAAAACw/b1xwtcTSGyg/s400/Screen+shot+2010-01-22+at+18.00.32.png" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5429625767439236578" /></a><br /><br />NEED comments<br /><br />---<br /><br /><br />some- professional views<div><br /></div><div> <a href="http://www.cinematography.com/index.php?showtopic=44053&pid=312962&st=0&#entry312962">click</a></div><div><br /></div>andrzejhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01283273918462257425noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8819959198194634158.post-66922704488772644642010-01-22T07:28:00.001-08:002010-01-22T15:34:53.945-08:00DiscussionAn ongoing discussion between myself, professionals and amateur cinematographers about Fine Art inside cinema.<br /><br /><div>---</div><div><br /></div><div><a href="http://www.cinematography.com/index.php?showtopic=44039&st=0">click me to view discussion</a></div>andrzejhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01283273918462257425noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8819959198194634158.post-82068422913644752502010-01-21T15:22:00.000-08:002010-01-22T15:27:07.252-08:00Blast Theory - Kidnap> <a href="http://www.blasttheory.co.uk/bt/work_kidnap.html">click for video</a> <<br /><br />Other than the loaded messages about release of control, Stockholm syndrome, and the provoking case concerning legalities of Sado-Masochism, the documentation of this art was very adulatory to it's cause. This is because the Art withholds a mixture of mediums such as moving image, sculpture, installation and performance. In doing so this creates an 'alternative reality', and an alternative reality cannot be experienced to a genuine level through documentation. For example a photo of a piece of installation work will not fulfil the same or possibly any depth of concept that being involved and situated within the installation will. Therefore recording work that involves installation and/or performance should only be seen as documentation rather than another medium to express the same concept.<br /><br />---<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_rMv4p1KILVk/S1ovaEHhZKI/AAAAAAAAADY/tHSP31nsYVU/s1600-h/magritte-pipe.jpeg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px; height: 140px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_rMv4p1KILVk/S1ovaEHhZKI/AAAAAAAAADY/tHSP31nsYVU/s200/magritte-pipe.jpeg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5429704425576948898" /></a><br /><br />Possible examples explaining this idea are, Magritte's "Ceci n'est pas une pipe" where he comments on a painting of a pipe being a painting of a pipe and not an actual pipe. More real life examples could be credited with the idea of visiting a country and taking photos. The photos will usually give an incorrect view of the country and not envelop the viewer in an alien reality.<br /><br />---<br /><br />Further reading i found interesting (about the court case that provoked 'kidnap')<br /><br />"The main case in relation to the issue of said-masochism is Brown and Others (1994), the defendants were members of a group of sado-masochist homosexuals who participated in violent acts against each other for sexual pleasure over a period of years. They were convicted of actual bodily harm under section 47 and wounding under section 20 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. They appealed on the basis of consent but were unsuccessful, both the Court of Appeal and House of Lords deciding that consent was not a valid defence in the circumstances. Lord Templeman stated: “The violence of sado-masochistic encounters involves the indulgence of cruelty by sadists and the degradation of victims. Such violence is injurious to the participants and unpredictably dangerous. I am not prepared to invent a defence of consent for sado-masochistic encounters which breed and glorify cruelty and result in offences under sections 47 and 20 of the Act of 1861…Society is entitled and bound to protect itself against a cult of violence.”<br />The main arguments presented against allowing the defence of consent for sado-masochism were the potential dangers of such activities, moral objections to the defendants’ activities and the possible corruption of young people as a result of such activities. These arguments support Dr Jepson’s statement that: “Consent should never be a valid defence when it comes to actual/serious offences against the person”, but are specifically in relation to the issue of sado-masochism. <br />The argument that the state should not interfere with those conducting sado-masochistic activities in private, with consent of the victim, due to the rights and freedoms of the individual has been largely unsuccessful. Although Article 8(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights provides that ‘Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life’, Article 8(2) limits this, allowing the intervention of public authorities due to the need for national security or public safety or for the protection of health or morals, or rights and freedoms of others, and the European Court of Human Rights upheld the decision in Brown and Others."<br /><br />Lisa Incledon - February 2005andrzejhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01283273918462257425noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8819959198194634158.post-412250798769503772010-01-21T09:09:00.001-08:002010-01-21T14:01:28.723-08:00'Six Years' - 'Eight years'<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_rMv4p1KILVk/S1iOF9jYVDI/AAAAAAAAACo/IaLjTjz1YdA/s1600-h/cadi.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 320px; height: 164px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_rMv4p1KILVk/S1iOF9jYVDI/AAAAAAAAACo/IaLjTjz1YdA/s320/cadi.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5429245583868580914" /></a><br /><br />Initial reaction received from the pieces of art are instantly directed to a parentally and chronological viewpoint.<br />This viewpoint ordered preconceptions to the viewers, causing the 'mystery game' to be played; when reading the pieces of art. Not only was it detrimental to the critique of the work but it also caused us to waste time, talking about all the semiotics and peoples reactions to them, which I thought was a given. This lead to overanalysing the pieces of work and attempts to read them as if 'clues from a puzzle' rather than accepting the pieces as solitary vehicles for the artists concepts.<br /><br />The work seemed to be presented together to emphasise and 'back up' each others points, this ended up being negative to the pieces. By using two pieces of art to emphasise each other would not have been as successful as possible just 'six years' presented solely. But if they were placed in continuum to provoke a discussion between them; resulting in possibly the analogy of children fighting for attention from their mother then this was a great addition to the piece of art. However I am not sure if I believe that this is true and instead it was more connected to not having enough confidence in presenting a solo piece of work (especially with a critique trend of work being presented in multiples) because the work didn't have the type of conversation between each other that felt in sync. But rather it felt as if it they were contradictory to each other and I found 'eight years' to have confusing symbology, possibly because 'six years' was clear that it was an anchor being represented in a cake yet 'eight years' wasn't as equally clear. Was it a piñata or was it a piece of homework? Thus bringing attention back to focusing on 'six years', which was more successful because it seemed more refined. It held simplicity within itself, yet the simplicity was adulatory to the work.<br /><br />One prominent question that arose in the critique was whether the art was catered to a specific audience. Said question; resulted in my personal conclusion that it was very similar to the Schrödinger's Cat conundrum, because there was not a definitive answer. But it brought about a discussion between the ideas that not every viewer will be a mother and in the same lifestyle situation as the artist. However every viewer will most likely have nostalgic childhood memories that relate to the pieces of art. Bringing this analogy to some sense, i this is a similar case with any piece of art, but it a question worth thinking about when presenting.<br /><br />The most interesting discussion points stemmed back to the popular crit topic of presentation. The work was presented in a very archival and clinical fashion. Becoming a contradiction to what seemed to be the point of the art that was presented. This could be what the artist wanted, causing the viewers to take a controlled and macro view of parental art. But i think it was possibly a halfway attempt between setting it up as if it was inside a gallery and trying to be an installation involving the viewers into the artists memory.<br /><br />The artists use of the skewed Duchampian ideals makes 'six years' successful and personally pleasing to my preferences and for me the piece could have been more successful with just 'six years' presented alone. More personal judgement needs to be made when presenting art; purely because the presentation was the most negative and contradictory element from this crit.andrzejhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01283273918462257425noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8819959198194634158.post-5507482965528262822009-11-11T07:12:00.001-08:002009-11-11T07:12:32.029-08:00"The Big Shave"<div><object width="320" height="195"><param name="movie" value="http://www.dailymotion.com/swf/x2jwek&colors=background:665C5C;&related=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.dailymotion.com/swf/x2jwek&colors=background:665C5C;&related=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="320" height="195" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always"></embed></object><br /><b><a href="http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2jwek_the-big-shave-martin-scorsese_shortfilms">THE BIG SHAVE - MARTIN SCORSESE</a></b><br /><i>Uploaded by <a href="http://www.dailymotion.com/BobbyMilk">BobbyMilk</a>. - <a href="http://www.dailymotion.com/gb/channel/shortfilms">Classic TV and last night's shows, online.</a></i></div>andrzejhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01283273918462257425noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8819959198194634158.post-42044917080504691932009-11-02T04:14:00.001-08:002009-11-05T05:57:04.914-08:00Oliver's Critique - "Untitled (ramp)"<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_rMv4p1KILVk/Su7Y_r2IdgI/AAAAAAAAABY/otutIhPH43Q/s1600-h/DSC01109.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 300px;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_rMv4p1KILVk/Su7Y_r2IdgI/AAAAAAAAABY/otutIhPH43Q/s400/DSC01109.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5399491591876933122" border="0" /></a><span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms;font-size:85%;" >The initial interest that sprung from the critique was the uniform positioning of the audience; this was due to the lighting used on the piece of art. However even though the initial viewing locations were all from one side and rigid, there was great importance with viewing the object as a whole. Allowing it be seen from all angles and the space behind it.<br /><br />My preliminary thoughts were that maybe it was based on Duchampian ideas of that an object that is considered to have no use; it must therefore be deemed art. But it felt like more than that, because it wasn't a readymade. The object had been created, and it represented an object that had distinct use. But clearly couldn't be used. Maybe this is what separated it from being just an object and being art?<br /><br />Everyone participating in the critique seemed to instantly assume that the piece was depicting elevation and the ramp was aiming upwards. However I decided to question this, and because it dramatically changed depending on which angle you were looking towards the piece, especially when it comes to how we read items in comparison to reading text.</span><span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms;font-size:85%;" > What I'm trying to say is generally in western countries text is read left to right and then right to left in some eastern countries. So for the western left to right style this can cause different ideas to come from the ramp on whether it is based on projection and upwards motion or downwards motion.<br /><br />Other atypical parts to this piece of art were the resources used for it's construction and how it appeared; because it was clearly a new and recent object. However it held an old appearance, because of the use of found and aged wood. You could say the use of new screws and nails were detrimental to the piece of art, however when we learnt what the artist was trying to say; I deem them to be adulatory to the concept of the piece of art. This is because if the concept to this piece of art is based around the idea memories of being nine years old and the urge to create and construct there would be no consideration to the aesthetics of the ramp, very little thought concerning safety and no appetite for patience and careful assembly. So the use of fresh nails/screws and found (or in the eyes of a child 'free') wood complimented the concept superlatively.</span><span></span><br /><span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms;font-size:85%;" ><br />From this piece there was also a great sense of waiting; this is accentuated by the space left between the object and the wall. Which to some extent is possibly just as important as the object itself; because it helps the provoke the thoughts of proportion and presence of the object. This also almost pushed the idea of viewing the object from multiple angles which allowed you to discover the negative space concealed behind the contrasting initial view of the object.<br /><br />In conclusion I believe the piece was successful in construction, medium and use of deconstructed found objects. However with the critique in general, there was too much time wasted on people not wanting to accept what the object was, and trying to see more than that was there. This could have been avoided with the creation of a title; because all the time spent questioning whether the object was "an aggressive insect fighting" or "stairway to heaven" felt very arbitrary to the to the true analysis and critique to the piece of art; and yes it may have been what people 'saw' in the piece of art, but it just seemed unhelpful.<br /><br />This brings me to finish on that as an artist you should think carefully about how you want your audience to react, whether you want the audience to have a slight insight to what the piece of art is about and then take their thoughts further (possibly with the use of a title) or whether you want the audience to be incredibly subjective about the piece of art?<br /></span>andrzejhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01283273918462257425noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8819959198194634158.post-40919093090262280002009-10-28T08:15:00.001-07:002009-10-28T08:21:21.063-07:00Frieze Art Fair<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_rMv4p1KILVk/SuhgeJAKmDI/AAAAAAAAABI/wtTSDGIrIAc/s1600-h/frieze.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 338px; height: 95px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_rMv4p1KILVk/SuhgeJAKmDI/AAAAAAAAABI/wtTSDGIrIAc/s400/frieze.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5397670224332494898" border="0" /></a><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">this</span> is frieze art fair.andrzejhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01283273918462257425noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8819959198194634158.post-8995245123270574402009-10-16T04:03:00.000-07:002009-11-02T05:16:57.430-08:00Martin Arnold<object height="344" width="425"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/aXgjugI-iFU&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/aXgjugI-iFU&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" height="344" width="425"></embed></object><span style=";font-family:verdana;font-size:85%;" ><br />Martin Arnold cuts, extends and reverses found films; with these obsessive and repetitive techniques Martin Arnold causes hidden narratives and subtexts to be read from the films.<br /><br />The two examples I briefly viewed were </span><span style="font-size:85%;"><span style="font-family:trebuchet ms;"> </span><i style="font-family: verdana;">Passage à l'acte</i><span style="font-family:trebuchet ms;"><span style="font-family:verdana;"> (1993) where a few succinct clips from Robbert Mulligan's </span><span style="font-style: italic;font-family:verdana;" >To Kill a Mocking Bird </span><span style="font-family:verdana;">(1962) have been revamped in the Martin Arnold style to generate an uncanny view of a family held up by aggression and thick tension. </span><span style="font-style: italic;font-family:verdana;" >Alone. Life Wastes Andy Hardy </span><span style="font-family:verdana;">(1998) in which Martin Arnold and compiled clips from various monotonous Andy Hardy films and constructs a narrative heavily influenced by Oedipus complex. By using harmless scenes with Andy Hardy's character and his mother; Martin Arnold's editing has caused them to appear incredibly obscene and lust driven.<br />In the example above, I believe this particular scene works well due to the music in the background; because when reversed and repeated I can't help but be overwhelmed by the intensity from the music mirroring the reversing of the visual.<br /><br />But does he</span></span></span><span style=";font-family:verdana;font-size:85%;" > search for these underlying narratives that seem hidden to initial viewer or simply create them?</span>andrzejhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01283273918462257425noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8819959198194634158.post-65818338662241914552009-10-14T02:32:00.000-07:002009-10-16T03:43:07.733-07:00'Chameleon' by Tina Gosalves<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_rMv4p1KILVk/StWwUzOGT5I/AAAAAAAAABA/ny557X9YLCs/s1600-h/chameleon.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 320px; height: 75px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_rMv4p1KILVk/StWwUzOGT5I/AAAAAAAAABA/ny557X9YLCs/s320/chameleon.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5392410000239251346" border="0" /></a><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><br /></span><span style=";font-family:lucida grande;font-size:100%;" >'</span><span style=";font-family:Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:100%;" ><span style="">Chameleon is an interactive video installation that explores the subject of emotional contagion between groups and individuals and it stems from Tina Gonsalves' continuing fascination with human emotion, intimacy and vulnerability. '<br /></span></span><span style=";font-family:Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:78%;" >http://www.fabrica.org.uk/whatson.htm</span><span style=";font-family:Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:100%;" ><br /><br />Tina Gonsalves worked on the Chameleon project with various professors ranging from </span><span style=";font-family:lucida grande;font-size:100%;" >Prof Rosalind Picard from Brighton and Sussex Medical School to </span><span style=";font-family:lucida grande;font-size:100%;" >social neuroscientist Prof Chris Frith</span><span style=";font-family:Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:100%;" >; with all of these minds at her disposal she developed an algorithm that assessed peoples emotional state. This algorithm would then determine how the prerecorded actor's emotions would appear on the screens. The concept is based on emotions and how people often attempt mirror the emotions of the people around them, other aspects of the concept were around how people attempt to 'read' others by their emotions and how they react to the current surroundings.<br /><br />Chameleon at Fabrica; eight to ten unframed squares hung from the ceiling, windows blocked out and the only light available was from the glares of the projections. Primarily I was very much intrigued and confused by these screens and how I saw other viewers reacting and staring into them. However I'm not sure if there were any technical problems or if this wasn't quite what was said to be delivered but after short experiments with each screen I noticed it didn't seem as if the actors inside the screens were reacting of their viewers. It seemed as if they were purely recordings with a slight aspect of chance to the order in which they were played but each actor would always end in the same reaction.<br /><br />Only way I could see this being relevant or worthwhile would be if the cameras attached to the projections were recording the viewers faces and reactions and then all recordings of the viewers would be collected and then this collection would form art itself. Then it would be interesting to not just see the art create art but a combination of the art and the viewers creating the art. Also the experience was incredibly unnatural and awkward because inside a gallery emotions and facial expressions aren't a common and standard thing. So the viewer is forced into pulling faces in hope of a reaction.<br /><br />In terms of display it did not live upto my expectations, it worked but i feel it could have been much more successful if the projections were larger and having six or so projections all focused on one viewer would result in the overwhelming aspect to the piece of art which could possibly spark emotions and reactions from the viewer.<br /></span>andrzejhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01283273918462257425noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8819959198194634158.post-63453467403393901392009-10-01T04:43:00.001-07:002009-10-01T04:43:51.700-07:00go away from here<span style="font-family: courier new;">go to www.andrzejdagostino.com</span>andrzejhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01283273918462257425noreply@blogger.com2