http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJvo3dKK3U0&feature=related :a link to Michael's video of Maypole located on YouTube. There are other videos of his performance art on YouTube as well.
Today when Michael walked into our class to present his manifesto, based on his appearance of a white button up, tie and black slacks, I would have never guessed he would have presented the performance that he did. All I could think, in between mentally acknowledging the truth in which he was speaking and literally laughing out loud, was this guy has balls. And, yes, I am speaking about more than just the one's visible through his long johns.
At first, when he started stripping I presumed that this guy was nutty, only to find out that he truly is, but in an interesting and intriguing way. Behind what may seem like insanity is actually a lot of thought and creativity that ultimately puts out a very understandable and relatable message.
When he brought up how he likes to use the Internet as a place for his art to exist and derive from, it related perfectly with what we have been spending so much time talking about in class. Especially with the last article we just read “Technical Reproduction and its Significance”. Michael is able to utilize the Internet to keep an archive of his visual work and also a way to spread it. However, watching the recordings of his work is immensely different than experiencing his work first hand in class today.
I found it incredibly intriguing that he accumulates other people's blogs that he finds online and meshes them together in a very well thought out monologue of sorts. I would have never thought of turning other people's blogs into art, (a story perhaps, however he is also doing that as well) but the way in which Michael has decided to truly bring them to life in an art performance, I find to be quite unique. I also really enjoy the irony that I have experienced in his work. Not only in his manifesto from class today where he was “for an art“ using blurbs from blogs about hating art, but even in watching his recorded pieces as well. For example, in the video link above of his performance in Salem, Maypole, having his setting look like a party with streamers while reciting commentary on the recession and work while physically being entangled and trapped in the streamers as he spins and becomes fatigued. Definitaly not a party.
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Reading response for 13. Technical Reproduction and its Significance by Ruth Pelzer p197-213
Summary of main points:
The woodcut from the early 1400's represents the earliest form of the reproducible image. Later came engravings, etchings in the sixteenth century and in the eighteenth century, the lithograph. Which for those times was a huge invention resulting in faster drawings and better quality of prints. Now of course there are many forms of technical produced images. There is photography, cinema films, television and most recently the Internet and web. All of these forms have had there affects on art, the world, culture and modernity. It may have been thought that with the next new invention of a way to create technical images would lead to an extinction of the previous ways. However, in art and the media, every creation still holds it's place in one way or another. For example, the television is a way for us to receive our news, however during the time of 9/11 newspaper sales went up because television doesn't do the same exact job as the newspaper and the photographs. As the article states, "Different media complement rather than replace one another. In the case of the current events, television gives the viewer as sense of participation almost as the events unfold, whereas the written word and printed photographic image provide relative permanence and hence carry more authority" (200). Today, because there are so many technically reproduced and produced images around us it has affected our notion of reality, into a state of 'hyperreality'. T.V and cinema largely affect this. T.V is such a hug part of American culture that we are incredibly and perhaps unknowingly greatly affected by it, thus concerning Baudrillards statement regarding 'the dissolution of TV into life and life into T.V'. Also in film and television we, the audience, are seeing everything repeated, similar ideas, story lines, plots, meaning etc. Everything is recycled, but everything is pushed further in order to keep up the viewers excitement. What may have seemed provocative 40 years ago, could be thought of as boring today, and culturally what we are viewing is setting the tone for our society.
Another aspect of 'hyperreality' is being able to experience something without actually experiencing it. You may feel you know Rome, because you have seen pictures or viewed it on T.V, but you have never been there, never smelled it, tasted the food, encountered the culture and history, but yet you feel you know Rome. This is very true about art in the same regards. Many people would say they know Michelangelo's The Sistine Chapel, yet few could say they have actual been physically there and witnessed it first hand. The reproduction of art through technological advances has its pluses and minuses. The artist's work because of this can have a greater audience then they ever imagined. The masses can be able to view such things even if they do not have the privilege of experiencing them first hand. But, it is true that the 'aura' of the work can be lost by not witnessing it firsthand. But what is worse, to never witness at all, or to witness reproduced? Also art can be reproduced in a different context. It can be turned into something completely different then attended. Art can be reproduced and brought into popular culture and then having a market value, where the 'aura' is actually intensified in terms of commodity fetishism.
Personal reflection:
I agree that different media complement rather than replace. If even their intentions are to do relatively the same thing, the outcome is different, therefore they both are needed or retain their importance. However, I feel that with the last decade's explosion of technology it is compromising other media forms. The Internet, could be used to replace nearly everything, beside the experience. You can watch movies on the web, watch T.V on the web, view art on the web, read articles, news, you can even create art on the computer. I just fear that the place for the artist will be lost. We have already explored the loss of the author and this is very true because of technical reproduction. Don't get me wrong, I love the availability, but in a way I do feel that technical reproduction and technical production is killing the old paint and canvas. It also helps to spread the revenue and audience but the demand for technological images is calling for flat copy of something multidimensional. Technical reproduction opens many doors and closes some windows. I feel it subtracts from the grittiness of the work, the fingerprints of the audience, but yet it is able to help the art commercially. In our daily lives I feel we are so bombarded by technological media that we are loosing authenticity and being emerged into a solely technical world.
The woodcut from the early 1400's represents the earliest form of the reproducible image. Later came engravings, etchings in the sixteenth century and in the eighteenth century, the lithograph. Which for those times was a huge invention resulting in faster drawings and better quality of prints. Now of course there are many forms of technical produced images. There is photography, cinema films, television and most recently the Internet and web. All of these forms have had there affects on art, the world, culture and modernity. It may have been thought that with the next new invention of a way to create technical images would lead to an extinction of the previous ways. However, in art and the media, every creation still holds it's place in one way or another. For example, the television is a way for us to receive our news, however during the time of 9/11 newspaper sales went up because television doesn't do the same exact job as the newspaper and the photographs. As the article states, "Different media complement rather than replace one another. In the case of the current events, television gives the viewer as sense of participation almost as the events unfold, whereas the written word and printed photographic image provide relative permanence and hence carry more authority" (200). Today, because there are so many technically reproduced and produced images around us it has affected our notion of reality, into a state of 'hyperreality'. T.V and cinema largely affect this. T.V is such a hug part of American culture that we are incredibly and perhaps unknowingly greatly affected by it, thus concerning Baudrillards statement regarding 'the dissolution of TV into life and life into T.V'. Also in film and television we, the audience, are seeing everything repeated, similar ideas, story lines, plots, meaning etc. Everything is recycled, but everything is pushed further in order to keep up the viewers excitement. What may have seemed provocative 40 years ago, could be thought of as boring today, and culturally what we are viewing is setting the tone for our society.
Another aspect of 'hyperreality' is being able to experience something without actually experiencing it. You may feel you know Rome, because you have seen pictures or viewed it on T.V, but you have never been there, never smelled it, tasted the food, encountered the culture and history, but yet you feel you know Rome. This is very true about art in the same regards. Many people would say they know Michelangelo's The Sistine Chapel, yet few could say they have actual been physically there and witnessed it first hand. The reproduction of art through technological advances has its pluses and minuses. The artist's work because of this can have a greater audience then they ever imagined. The masses can be able to view such things even if they do not have the privilege of experiencing them first hand. But, it is true that the 'aura' of the work can be lost by not witnessing it firsthand. But what is worse, to never witness at all, or to witness reproduced? Also art can be reproduced in a different context. It can be turned into something completely different then attended. Art can be reproduced and brought into popular culture and then having a market value, where the 'aura' is actually intensified in terms of commodity fetishism.
Personal reflection:
I agree that different media complement rather than replace. If even their intentions are to do relatively the same thing, the outcome is different, therefore they both are needed or retain their importance. However, I feel that with the last decade's explosion of technology it is compromising other media forms. The Internet, could be used to replace nearly everything, beside the experience. You can watch movies on the web, watch T.V on the web, view art on the web, read articles, news, you can even create art on the computer. I just fear that the place for the artist will be lost. We have already explored the loss of the author and this is very true because of technical reproduction. Don't get me wrong, I love the availability, but in a way I do feel that technical reproduction and technical production is killing the old paint and canvas. It also helps to spread the revenue and audience but the demand for technological images is calling for flat copy of something multidimensional. Technical reproduction opens many doors and closes some windows. I feel it subtracts from the grittiness of the work, the fingerprints of the audience, but yet it is able to help the art commercially. In our daily lives I feel we are so bombarded by technological media that we are loosing authenticity and being emerged into a solely technical world.
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
What world views are brought together in the 2010 Murakami exhibition at versailles and what meaning do you think arises from the contact?
Murakami himself, as an artist is reaching iconic status. In 2008 he was on the list of Time Magazine’s 100 Most Influential People and was the only visual artist on the list. Murakami is a power house dominating in Japanese contemporary art. He is a master of Kawaii and Manga. Murakami started out doing traditional Japanese art, but found it to be irrelevant and switched to contemporary art with a focus on marketing. He has been deemed the “Andy Warhol of Japan” except he isn’t replicating already iconic images, he is creating his own. Murakami’s work is so popular it is on Louie Vuitton bags, key chains, T-shirts, mouse pads, dolls, blackberry cases and ranges from cheap to extremely expensive. He has even worked with Western Pop icons such as Britney Spears and Kanye West. His Paintings and Sculptures are bringing in upwards of 9 million each and his merchandise brings in a yearly turnover of 13 million.
By bringing his work into the Château de Versailles it is bringing together two dream worlds. The Château de Versailles is known for its extreme extravagance and seems like it could be the only place that make Murakami’s sculptures with a price tag of 9 million seem like no big thing. The Château de Versailles is one of Western History’s most lavish symbols and seemingly Murakami is turning into one of Japan’s most influential and recognizable symbols. When at first these two might seem like an odd pair, in fact go hand in hand when looked at from a the perspective of consumerism, consumption and cultural relevance.
Movie Poster Images (In same order)
This posters uses the similar style of illustration, but brings in the focus of the love affair and really hones in on the western feeling.
The other films I selected didn't have posters I believe showcased their era, but I am unable to delete them from the blog.
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
What are the similarites and differences between Courbet's project and Murakami's?
The Stonebreakers
Versailles Exhibition
In Murakami's project, he too, like Courbet, is trying to convey a "truth" that is relevant to him and Japanese art, but his commentary is done in a "mythical" sense in opposition to Courbet's "non-mythical" depiction. Although Murakami's art appears superficially innocent and escapist, it is an index of the cultural and social whirl of postmodern Tokyo (Mulholland 123). Murakami presents a political project which represents a cultural self consciousness. Murakami stresses the insurgence of consumer-driven subcultures, equating in generational Japanese rebelliousness with voyeuristic passive aggression, sexual fetishism and compositional dynamism (123). He does this through the doctrine of superflat “a cultural oxymoron, a ritualistic form of resistance against the perceived oppressiveness of the ritualistic behavior that dominates Japanese daily life” (123).
movie posters
Modern Times is a 1936 American comedy film by Charlie Chaplin that has his iconic Little Tramp character struggling to survive in the modern, industrialized world. The film is a comment on the desperate employment and fiscal conditions many people faced during the Great Depression, conditions created, in Chaplin's view, by the efficiencies of modern industrialization. The movie stars Chaplin, Paulette Goddard, Henry Bergman, Stanley Sandford and Chester Conklin, and was written and directed by Chaplin.
Modern Times was deemed "culturally significant" by the Library of Congress in 1989, and selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry.
The film tells the story of the Joads, an Oklahoma family, who, after losing their farm during the Great Depression in the 1930s, become migrant workers and end up in California. The motion picture details their arduous journey across the United States as they travel to California in search for work and opportunities for the family members.
In 1989, this film was one of the first 25 films to be selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry by the Library of Congress as being "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant."
The Philadelphia Story is a 1940 American romantic comedy film. It was directed by George Cukor, starring Cary Grant, Katharine Hepburn, and James Stewart. Based on the Broadway play of the same name by Philip Barry, with screenplay by Donald Ogden Stewart and an uncredited Waldo Salt, the film is about a socialite whose wedding plans are complicated by the simultaneous arrival of her ex-husband and an attractive journalist. It is considered one of the best examples of a comedy of remarriage, a genre popular in the 1930s and 1940s, in which a couple divorce, flirt with outsiders and then remarry – a useful story-telling ploy at a time when the depiction of extramarital affairs was blocked by the Production Code.
Peter Shaffer's Amadeus is a 1984 drama biopic film directed by Miloš Forman and written by Peter Shaffer. Adapted from Shaffer's stage play Amadeus, the story is based loosely on the lives of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and Antonio Salieri, two composers who lived in Vienna, Austria, during the latter half of the 18th century.
American Graffiti is a 1973 coming of age comedy-drama film co-written and directed by George Lucas, and starring Richard Dreyfuss, Ron Howard, Paul Le Mat, Charles Martin Smith, Cindy Williams, Candy Clark, Mackenzie Phillips, Bo Hopkins, Kathleen Quinlan and Harrison Ford. Set in Modesto, California, American Graffiti is a study of the cruising and rock and roll cultures popular among the Post-World War II baby boom generation. The film is a nostalgic portrait of teenage life in the early 1960s told in a series of vignettes, featuring a group of teenagers and their adventures in a single night in late August 1962.
Gone with the Wind is a 1939 American epic romance-drama film adapted from Margaret Mitchell's 1936 novel of the same name. It was produced by David O. Selznick and directed by Victor Fleming from a screenplay by Sidney Howard. The epic film, set in the Old South in and around the time of the American Civil War, stars Clark Gable, Vivien Leigh, Leslie Howard, Olivia de Havilland, and Hattie McDaniel. It tells a story of the American Civil War and Reconstruction Era from a white, Southern point of view.
The Breakfast Club is a 1985 American teen drama written and directed by John Hughes. The storyline follows five teenagers (each a member of a different high school clique) as they spend a Saturday in detention together and come to realize that they are all deeper than their respective stereotypes.
The film tells the story of a wounded deserter from the Confederate army close to the end of the American Civil War who is on his way to return to the love of his life, Ada Monroe.
The Queen is a 2006 British-French drama film directed by Stephen Frears, written by Peter Morgan, and starring Helen Mirren as the title role, Queen Elizabeth II. Released almost a decade after the event, the film depicts a fictional account of the immediate events following the death of Diana, Princess of Wales on 31 August 1997.
Memoirs of a Geisha tells the story of a young girl, Chiyo Sakamoto, who is sold into slavery by her family. Her new family then sends her off to school to become a geisha. This movie is mainly about older Chiyo and her struggle as a geisha to find love, in the process making a lot of enemies before and after World War II.
Dazed and Confused is a 1993 coming of age comedy film written and directed by Richard Linklater. The film's large ensemble cast featured a number of future stars, including Matthew McConaughey, Jason London, Ben Affleck, Milla Jovovich, Cole Hauser, Parker Posey, Anthony Rapp, Adam Goldberg, Joey Lauren Adams, Nicky Katt, and Rory Cochrane. The film depicts a group of teenagers during the last day of school in 1976.
Pearl Harbor is a dramatic reimagining of the Japanese Attack on Pearl Harbor and the subsequent Doolittle Raid. Some of its scenes were among the last to be filmed in Technicolor.
Things that represent the current zeitgeist
1. Text Messaging
2. I-phone/ iPod
3. The Iraq war
4. The election of president Obama
5. Reality T.V
6. 9/11
7. Hurricane Katrina
8. 3D/ Digital T.V
9. Global Warming
10. Obesity
11. Stem cell research
12. The Human Genome Project
13. Internet
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)