Wednesday, December 3, 2008
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
Days I've Been Alive
This wasn't a standard article about art that featured both words and pictures. This was a very simple and interesting way to show how long this artist has been alive. In the Cabinet Magazine Online, there was a link by Ron Lent entitled, "Days I've Been Alive." When you click on it, it takes you to this very basic gray computer screen that explains that this is how many days he's been alive represented by dots. There are just rows after rows of tiny dots. Each of these dots represents a day this person has been alive. I took the time to count them and there are exactly the number it says on the top, which today is 15144, meaning the guy is 41.
I thought this was interesting because it's a very simple idea that anyone could do, only I've never seen it before. It reminds me of the stereotypical tally that is kept in prison in movies of how many days a prisoner has been in that cell. It was very cool to see all the dots fill the page. When you think of your age in terms of years, it doesn't seem like that high of a number. But when you physically map out the amount of days on one page on the computer, it really lets you see how long you've been living and how many days you've experienced. I thought it was a very cool way to appreciate all the time you've spent on earth so far. I'm sure the artist just thought it would be a neat calender of his age. If he wanted to go further, there could be a way of color coding certain events in his life. For example, if he wanted to see how many days he's celebrated his or others birthdays, he could make that dot for that day orange. If he wanted to see how many days he had to know someone died, whether it be someone close to him or someone he read about in the paper like a celebrity, he could make that dot green. Messing around with the dots of our days is a creative way to see just how many days were similar to other days. I guess the only way you could pull this off is if you have a really good memory, or lots of dates written down to include in this. Either way, I liked his concept of being able to literally see your past.
I thought this was interesting because it's a very simple idea that anyone could do, only I've never seen it before. It reminds me of the stereotypical tally that is kept in prison in movies of how many days a prisoner has been in that cell. It was very cool to see all the dots fill the page. When you think of your age in terms of years, it doesn't seem like that high of a number. But when you physically map out the amount of days on one page on the computer, it really lets you see how long you've been living and how many days you've experienced. I thought it was a very cool way to appreciate all the time you've spent on earth so far. I'm sure the artist just thought it would be a neat calender of his age. If he wanted to go further, there could be a way of color coding certain events in his life. For example, if he wanted to see how many days he's celebrated his or others birthdays, he could make that dot for that day orange. If he wanted to see how many days he had to know someone died, whether it be someone close to him or someone he read about in the paper like a celebrity, he could make that dot green. Messing around with the dots of our days is a creative way to see just how many days were similar to other days. I guess the only way you could pull this off is if you have a really good memory, or lots of dates written down to include in this. Either way, I liked his concept of being able to literally see your past.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Probably Going to have Nightmares...
In the main screen of the Cabinet Magazine Online website, there was a link that sent me to a fake TV trailer by Guy Ben-Ner. The concept was a family sitcom that was filmed in an IKEA during store hours. He and his wife were walking from room to room discussing family problems as if they were in a house of their own. Throughout this, we see actual customers walking through the rooms to examine the price tags that are hanging all over everything. They are walking in front of the camera and acknowledging that something is being filmed. The actors, for the most part, keep to their characters and continue on with the dialogue and actions. I found this pretty hilarious because I know if I were to see this happening while I was shopping, I would stop and watch. The fake television show itself was pretty bland and unintriguing, so the only way I could see myself getting into it is if it were in that setting with all it's spontaneity. This installment in the journal's website contributes to not only the hilarity of some of the things you can find in that page, but shows the making of something that shows the medium of which it's created. For the most part we see this as any basic television show where the family interacts only with each other in their own little made up world. However, every once in a while, we are ripped away from that when outsiders who aren't in on the secret are trying to figure out exactly what's going on. Their reactions give us a little incite on the way it's being filmed. In one case, two women investigate the camera and give off the impression that the camera is not really hidden and is obviously recording. Most times when we see a video that someone has made, especially a "TV trailer," we don't expect to be reminded that there is actually some sort of filming going on and the family we are seeing isn't what they appear to be. They use the rooms as if it were one in their house. The props they use are things that people can just walk right in and put in their shopping carts. The IKEA store is made out to be a smorgasbord of free studios.
Now, what will haunt my dreams for the next night or two is the article I decided to read from this journal. It was in an edition called "Bones" and was entitled "The Museum of the Dead." I'm a huge horror movie fan and can usually handle the weirdest of images. However, as I was scrolling down to finish reading this article, the craziest picture came on my screen. Because I refuse to look at that thing again, I have not read past the picture. I'm not sure why it freaked me out so badly, but it brought out this emotion of fear in me. The article itself is about this church in Palermo that features plaster sculptures from a man named Giacomo Serpotta. These figures are different types of skulls and bodies that are supposed to represent the unwanted dead. As I was reading it, I found it pretty interesting that such a place existed. That there is a church with art in it that is uncommon to the bright and colorful art I have seen in churches around here. This morbid sanctuary of figures must be a pretty unique and, judging by the pictures, realistic looking place to visit. The two parts of the journal that I looked at have a very interesting connection. Both the pictures and the video consist of things that aren't exactly what they appear. The video's setting is not a house but rather a mock up of a room in order to sell its' contents. The bodies in this church are not real bodies, but rather the resemblance of what a body would look like hung up on the walls. Both forms of media do a good job of displaying both the symbolic meaning of the things displayed as well as the realistic.
The picture that I wish to have extracted from my memory is the third one down if you care to take a gander. Freaky Shrieking Man Face
Now, what will haunt my dreams for the next night or two is the article I decided to read from this journal. It was in an edition called "Bones" and was entitled "The Museum of the Dead." I'm a huge horror movie fan and can usually handle the weirdest of images. However, as I was scrolling down to finish reading this article, the craziest picture came on my screen. Because I refuse to look at that thing again, I have not read past the picture. I'm not sure why it freaked me out so badly, but it brought out this emotion of fear in me. The article itself is about this church in Palermo that features plaster sculptures from a man named Giacomo Serpotta. These figures are different types of skulls and bodies that are supposed to represent the unwanted dead. As I was reading it, I found it pretty interesting that such a place existed. That there is a church with art in it that is uncommon to the bright and colorful art I have seen in churches around here. This morbid sanctuary of figures must be a pretty unique and, judging by the pictures, realistic looking place to visit. The two parts of the journal that I looked at have a very interesting connection. Both the pictures and the video consist of things that aren't exactly what they appear. The video's setting is not a house but rather a mock up of a room in order to sell its' contents. The bodies in this church are not real bodies, but rather the resemblance of what a body would look like hung up on the walls. Both forms of media do a good job of displaying both the symbolic meaning of the things displayed as well as the realistic.
The picture that I wish to have extracted from my memory is the third one down if you care to take a gander. Freaky Shrieking Man Face
Acting and Reacting to Act/React
After watching the dvd of the Milwaukee Art Museum's exhibit "Act/React," the instillation I was most eager to see was Brian Knep's Healing Pool. As a kid I always loved those toys that would change colors according to your body heat. You could put your hand down on it and a colorful hand print would remain. When I got to the floor piece that had the design on it, I immediately ran across it to watch the cells start to reform around my path. Not only was the entire experience aesthetically pleasing to look at, but the concept that my walking across it destroys part of a floor and it can rebuild itself was pretty attractive as well. It made me think about the butterfly affect and how causing one thing to happen will change it and make it become something else. Before I stepped on this floor, the pattern it shown was created by the people who have stepped on it before me. When I was done wandering around on it, the creation that was left was there for whoever came later to change it. It became an ongoing process as more people entered the museum and found amusement by running around on it. It was interesting like how a snowflake is interesting. Knowing that what I'm seeing now will never again look EXACTLY like this once someone else comes in and changes it.
The other piece of work that I found intriguing would have to be Janet Cardiff's To Touch. Watching it on the dvd didn't interest me nearly as much as when I saw it in person. The atmosphere of it being in a room all by itself and lit only by an overhead lighting made it creepy yet inviting. I was pretty bored with the concept I learned about it prior to going, but when I interacted with it, I had fun playing around with it. I would hear sounds that I wanted to keep going after it stopped, but I wouldn't be able to find it as I hunted around for it. I kept trying to find the carnival song but I kept hearing other sounds instead. It became sort of frustrating as I sorted through the other unwanted sounds to find mine. The fact that it brought out that emotion in me when I thought it would be the most boring piece there was what made me think it was the second best. The table itself is pretty boring but interesting so it plays well as a good hook to draw people in. When people interact with it and experience the sounds that they are somewhat responsible for causing, they help to not finish the piece, but keep it alive.
In his article, George Fifield talks about how up until a few decades ago, the main form of interactive art was video games. Being able to take a joystick or controller and move around people and objects that someone else has digitally placed onto your tv was a great way to give the players creative leeway into the creators art. Now, with the Act/React exhibit as a leading example, we get to see how things have changed over the years. Simple objects that we see or use everyday, such as a table, are transformed into a fun type of game. Boring floors that we're used to walking on are changed into a colorful and ever-changing work of art.
The other piece of work that I found intriguing would have to be Janet Cardiff's To Touch. Watching it on the dvd didn't interest me nearly as much as when I saw it in person. The atmosphere of it being in a room all by itself and lit only by an overhead lighting made it creepy yet inviting. I was pretty bored with the concept I learned about it prior to going, but when I interacted with it, I had fun playing around with it. I would hear sounds that I wanted to keep going after it stopped, but I wouldn't be able to find it as I hunted around for it. I kept trying to find the carnival song but I kept hearing other sounds instead. It became sort of frustrating as I sorted through the other unwanted sounds to find mine. The fact that it brought out that emotion in me when I thought it would be the most boring piece there was what made me think it was the second best. The table itself is pretty boring but interesting so it plays well as a good hook to draw people in. When people interact with it and experience the sounds that they are somewhat responsible for causing, they help to not finish the piece, but keep it alive.
In his article, George Fifield talks about how up until a few decades ago, the main form of interactive art was video games. Being able to take a joystick or controller and move around people and objects that someone else has digitally placed onto your tv was a great way to give the players creative leeway into the creators art. Now, with the Act/React exhibit as a leading example, we get to see how things have changed over the years. Simple objects that we see or use everyday, such as a table, are transformed into a fun type of game. Boring floors that we're used to walking on are changed into a colorful and ever-changing work of art.
Monday, October 6, 2008
Field Report Number One
We have always taken the time to appreciate how the persons' ideas and concepts can be emulated through narrative or documentary film making. Lately we have been discussing the filmmakers' role in the creation and story of the films they are creating.
A film that I found particularly "striking" would be David Gatten's "What the Water Said." When I say striking, I mean intrusive. Never before have I watched something that was so irritating and redundant that I actually had to plug my ears and look away throughout most of it. Although I found it's bombarding acoustics and migraine inducing visuals to resemble that of Chinese water torture, I could appreciate the creative way in which it was made. To create something so "in your face" and really unpleasant to experience is one thing, but to have done that in such a creative way as Gatten had done was pretty interesting. When I learned that he had taken film and thrown it into lobster cages, allowing the creatures and the water to scratch it up and create what I had seen and heard, it didn't make me hate the film any less, but it made me think, "hey, that was actually a pretty cool idea." I wondered what else you could create by taking actual film strips and lodging them somewhere, allowing outside elements to take control of your creative process.
Relating this to a work seen outside the class, viewing Charles Burnett's film, "The Killer of Sheep" inside class as well as outside the class allowed for me to appreciate the film a little more. When I viewed it in class it was a pretty attention keeping narrative, one about which I found nothing bad to say. When I got to see Burnett actually speak and then re watch the film, I found that seeing the film maker in person and watching his work creates a different feel to the whole experience of film watching. Much like reading about what Gatten did to the film in order to create his project, seeing the person who created the project and hear them speak about their work let me feel more a part of the film than I had just watching it in class a few days before.
Sometimes in literature when you learn something about the author that correlates to the book you are reading, you can create a bias towards the opinions he or she is trying to express. This leaves me with the wondering of whether it is best to know about the creator, or keep that mystery alive in order to form your own opinions about the creation. What I have learned about this assignment is that watching a film and judging it on how it looks, sounds, and overall presents itself as is really just a very basic way to watch a film. Going the extra step and learning a little something about it's process or the creator often times improves the experience of the film.
A film that I found particularly "striking" would be David Gatten's "What the Water Said." When I say striking, I mean intrusive. Never before have I watched something that was so irritating and redundant that I actually had to plug my ears and look away throughout most of it. Although I found it's bombarding acoustics and migraine inducing visuals to resemble that of Chinese water torture, I could appreciate the creative way in which it was made. To create something so "in your face" and really unpleasant to experience is one thing, but to have done that in such a creative way as Gatten had done was pretty interesting. When I learned that he had taken film and thrown it into lobster cages, allowing the creatures and the water to scratch it up and create what I had seen and heard, it didn't make me hate the film any less, but it made me think, "hey, that was actually a pretty cool idea." I wondered what else you could create by taking actual film strips and lodging them somewhere, allowing outside elements to take control of your creative process.
Relating this to a work seen outside the class, viewing Charles Burnett's film, "The Killer of Sheep" inside class as well as outside the class allowed for me to appreciate the film a little more. When I viewed it in class it was a pretty attention keeping narrative, one about which I found nothing bad to say. When I got to see Burnett actually speak and then re watch the film, I found that seeing the film maker in person and watching his work creates a different feel to the whole experience of film watching. Much like reading about what Gatten did to the film in order to create his project, seeing the person who created the project and hear them speak about their work let me feel more a part of the film than I had just watching it in class a few days before.
Sometimes in literature when you learn something about the author that correlates to the book you are reading, you can create a bias towards the opinions he or she is trying to express. This leaves me with the wondering of whether it is best to know about the creator, or keep that mystery alive in order to form your own opinions about the creation. What I have learned about this assignment is that watching a film and judging it on how it looks, sounds, and overall presents itself as is really just a very basic way to watch a film. Going the extra step and learning a little something about it's process or the creator often times improves the experience of the film.
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
Surveying Art Journals
I have decided for this portion of the class to explore the Cabinet Magazine Online
I didn't want to pick a website or magazine that focused more on film because that's what I'm studying in everything else. This page has a lot of pictures and stories that seem to be pretty interesting. I'll admit what sold me on the idea of this particular page was the first sub link I clicked off of it entitled Enormous Muffins. It was just a bunch of pictures of people my age baking a huge muffin in a flower pot. I found this to be pretty hilarious and right up my alley so this is the page I am sticking with.
I didn't want to pick a website or magazine that focused more on film because that's what I'm studying in everything else. This page has a lot of pictures and stories that seem to be pretty interesting. I'll admit what sold me on the idea of this particular page was the first sub link I clicked off of it entitled Enormous Muffins. It was just a bunch of pictures of people my age baking a huge muffin in a flower pot. I found this to be pretty hilarious and right up my alley so this is the page I am sticking with.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)