Lauren Dobbins
Art Manifesto
ART 112
I Am For an Art
I am for an art that is erotic.
An art that arouses thought.
That stimulates your fingertips as you imagine
Them tracing along the lines and texture,
Or if you’re lucky enough, actually get to meet.
I am for an art that speaks.
An art that has something to say.
Something to scream
Or something to whisper.
Something deep and abstract.
Something simple and concrete.
Even if it is only to say,
“The flowers in the spring are breathtaking.”
I for an art that hangs in public bathrooms.
An art that is put there simply because it looks good.
Not that is needed, and that is the joy of it.
I am for an art that is impractical.
I am for an art that is impertinent.
I am for an art that is impossible.
Because it can be.
I am for an art that expresses our freedom.
Our freedom to imagine.
To create.
To live in an alternative dream world.
Or to face the truth of our world.
I am for an art that is an escape.
For the artist.
For the viewer.
I am for an art created in the mind
And made with the hands.
Or the toes.
Ankles.
Elbows.
Knees.
I am for an art that exists for the sake of expression.
That is not needed to survive.
But needed to live.
I am for an art that evokes an emotion.
That keeps you coming back,
To feel, and feel again
Because these days,
Things are starting to feel routine.
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Katy Asher & The M.O.S.T
I loved hearing from Katy Asher about The M.O.S.T. The whole "ministry" / "embassy" was fascinating. I think that the "Ministry of Small Things" is ingenious. I would love to have a group where we met regularly to talk about the "small" things in life and see what we have in common. I suppose that is what my friends and I do. Maybe we should turn ourselves into an official group. I can't believe that they got the project to go so far, stretching over years and being able to travel, even out of the continent on behalf of The M.O.S.T. All the maps were so detailed and really created a feeling of authenticity. The trading cards were great too. Everthing they did and created had so much effort and thought put into it. I can only imagine how much fun it mus have been to be able to create your own world in a sense, and actually having it be more than just yourself and your friends involved. I wish that I had been aware of them when they were still together and could have gone to one of their exhibitions. One thing that I personally enjoyed was their version of marriage in Mostlandia. That was so cute how you could rate it on how "gaga" you were for someone. And how they served ice cream and refreshments at all their events really added to the fantasy and fun of the whole thing. While on the other hand, what they were producing was this fanciful world, but everything that went into it and all the planning, work and behind the scene was very systematic with so many details envolved. The whole world seemed to be full of whimsy and fun but it is fascinating how much actual real hard work was put into creating it. It really seemed like they truely believed in this world. And really, for anyone to have taken it seriously, the members had to and it really showed how much time and effort and creativity went into the creation of The M.O.S.T. I find it inspiring that a typical group of people with things in common can establish themselves into an embassy, create a nation, get followers and sustain it for years.
The Man Who Never Threw Anything Away" reader response
Ilya Kabakov, “The Man Who Never Threw Anything Away”
The article starts off with the story of a plumber who lived in an apartment. It had gotten exceptionally cold and it was necessary for the heat to be checked. Three grease covered men insisted to the chief tenant that they get into the plumber’s room. No one appeared to be there so they broke down the door and inside was piles and piles of trash. “The entire room, from floor to ceiling was filled with heaps of different types of garbage. But this wasn’t a disgusting, stinking junkyard like the one in our yard or in large bins near gates of our building, but rather a gigantic warehouse of the most varied things, arranged in a special, one might say carefully maintained, order” (32). The arrangement was quite spectacular and brings to mind the idea of what comprises “garbage.” Kabakov goes on to talk about how what may seem like trash to one person may not seem like trash to another because of the sentimental value it may possess. Or even still, how certain things may seem important, like post cards or old letters while common sense tells us other things are less important and therefore is trash and should be tossed out. Kabakov refutes this idea by saying, “Why should common sense be stronger than my memories, stronger than all the moments of my life which are attached to these scraps of paper which now seem funny and useless?” (33). He continues to theorize the importance of the “trash” in his life saying that it is the only true tangible artifacts that can confirm his existence by proving his past and that to which has shaped him. He concludes his piece by relating the whole world to a dump saying that “the whole world, everything which surrounds me here, is to me a boundless dump with no ends or borders, an inexhaustible, diverse sea of garbage. In this refuse of an enormous city one can feel the powerful breathing of its entire past. This whole dump is full of twinkling starts, reflections and fragments of culture…” (35). He states that we have lost the border of garbage and non-garbage and that everything in our world is cluttered in garbage. But on a positive note he ends by concluding that it is from this garbage that preserves and incites new projects, ideas and a “certain enthusiasm arises, hopes for the rebirth of something, though it is well known that all of this will be covered with new layers of garbage” (37).
The thing that really caught my attention most in this piece, that was touched on the least, but I thought most vital to the whole theory was the idea of time. I’m sure the thought has crossed my mind before, but I don’t think I had ever thought in depth about it until reading this article.
The concept of time is quite boggling. It exists only because we created it. And all we ever really have to prove the existence of time or even the existence of lives and life is through artifacts. I have a box in which I keep “trash” that I find valuable. Everything in the box has a memory for me that I want to keep safe and for forever. I never really thought before that perhaps the things I keep in my box are also for proof of my existence. Proof of the event and proof of time; of my past. And it is interesting, with this in mind, that our whole nation, society as we know it is based on tangible artifacts; things that represent the existence of our past. And how collectively people’s existence that exists only in tangible “trash” will, can, and has been buried under more and more accumulated trash. It’s not like we can gather all our trash or anything and just shoot it off our world into outer space. It is like saying that everything that was, still is. It’s almost comforting in a way, until you remember that after you die all your things will be sold in an estate sale and the person who bought your vase never knew your story or will soon forget. But perhaps your daughter kept your ring and gave it to your granddaughter and she passed it on and the memory of you travels along with it. Or maybe there is comfort simply in the thought that your vase and your ring still exist even after you cease to.
The article starts off with the story of a plumber who lived in an apartment. It had gotten exceptionally cold and it was necessary for the heat to be checked. Three grease covered men insisted to the chief tenant that they get into the plumber’s room. No one appeared to be there so they broke down the door and inside was piles and piles of trash. “The entire room, from floor to ceiling was filled with heaps of different types of garbage. But this wasn’t a disgusting, stinking junkyard like the one in our yard or in large bins near gates of our building, but rather a gigantic warehouse of the most varied things, arranged in a special, one might say carefully maintained, order” (32). The arrangement was quite spectacular and brings to mind the idea of what comprises “garbage.” Kabakov goes on to talk about how what may seem like trash to one person may not seem like trash to another because of the sentimental value it may possess. Or even still, how certain things may seem important, like post cards or old letters while common sense tells us other things are less important and therefore is trash and should be tossed out. Kabakov refutes this idea by saying, “Why should common sense be stronger than my memories, stronger than all the moments of my life which are attached to these scraps of paper which now seem funny and useless?” (33). He continues to theorize the importance of the “trash” in his life saying that it is the only true tangible artifacts that can confirm his existence by proving his past and that to which has shaped him. He concludes his piece by relating the whole world to a dump saying that “the whole world, everything which surrounds me here, is to me a boundless dump with no ends or borders, an inexhaustible, diverse sea of garbage. In this refuse of an enormous city one can feel the powerful breathing of its entire past. This whole dump is full of twinkling starts, reflections and fragments of culture…” (35). He states that we have lost the border of garbage and non-garbage and that everything in our world is cluttered in garbage. But on a positive note he ends by concluding that it is from this garbage that preserves and incites new projects, ideas and a “certain enthusiasm arises, hopes for the rebirth of something, though it is well known that all of this will be covered with new layers of garbage” (37).
The thing that really caught my attention most in this piece, that was touched on the least, but I thought most vital to the whole theory was the idea of time. I’m sure the thought has crossed my mind before, but I don’t think I had ever thought in depth about it until reading this article.
The concept of time is quite boggling. It exists only because we created it. And all we ever really have to prove the existence of time or even the existence of lives and life is through artifacts. I have a box in which I keep “trash” that I find valuable. Everything in the box has a memory for me that I want to keep safe and for forever. I never really thought before that perhaps the things I keep in my box are also for proof of my existence. Proof of the event and proof of time; of my past. And it is interesting, with this in mind, that our whole nation, society as we know it is based on tangible artifacts; things that represent the existence of our past. And how collectively people’s existence that exists only in tangible “trash” will, can, and has been buried under more and more accumulated trash. It’s not like we can gather all our trash or anything and just shoot it off our world into outer space. It is like saying that everything that was, still is. It’s almost comforting in a way, until you remember that after you die all your things will be sold in an estate sale and the person who bought your vase never knew your story or will soon forget. But perhaps your daughter kept your ring and gave it to your granddaughter and she passed it on and the memory of you travels along with it. Or maybe there is comfort simply in the thought that your vase and your ring still exist even after you cease to.
The Philosophy of Andy Warhol Reader Response
Warhol starts off talking about how people should live in one large empty room, clear of all the clutter that people tend to collect. He says that everything should be locked away and stored somewhere else. That if you can't get rid of everything you should have a closet for your things, but a separate closet, "So you don't use it as a crutch too much."(31) He states an example that if you lived in New York you should keep your closet no closer than New Jersey. He uses that logic that nobody want to, "feel you're living next to your own dump."(31) Other people would be more bearable because you wouldn't know all of the exact contents, that knowing about everything that is in there and thinking about it too much could drive a person insane. He continues to say that everything in your closet should be thrown out at some point and expire like food. Warhol states that the best thing to do is to have a box for a month, put all your stuff in it, then lock it up and send it to your closet in New Jersey
I thought that this article could be referring to a couple of things; first to the clutter of thoughts that fill our brain, and second to the clutter that fills our lives. He says that we should all have a big empty space, a clear mind without being crowded by all of the stuff we store in our minds and pour over and over, taking up brain space. He says that we should keep things while we need them, but that at some point they should be sent away to free up the space. Eventually though he says these things should all be thrown out. Sometimes he even wishes that things would just go away forever, and that he wouldn’t ever have to think about them again. At the end he contradicts this way of think though by saying that he does really want to keep some things there, to use later. There are things that you don’t want to forget. I think he could also be talking about the clutter that people tend to have, making our lives chaotic. Clutter made up of; everything from our work, our busy social schedules, the things that worry us, bills, and all the material possessions that one tends to accumulate in life. All of these things are taking up space in our lives, making them more hectic. And while the chaos can be overwhelming at times, even preventing us from progressing in life, sometimes it can be useful to tap into it and pull from it ideas, memories and new projects.
I thought that this article could be referring to a couple of things; first to the clutter of thoughts that fill our brain, and second to the clutter that fills our lives. He says that we should all have a big empty space, a clear mind without being crowded by all of the stuff we store in our minds and pour over and over, taking up brain space. He says that we should keep things while we need them, but that at some point they should be sent away to free up the space. Eventually though he says these things should all be thrown out. Sometimes he even wishes that things would just go away forever, and that he wouldn’t ever have to think about them again. At the end he contradicts this way of think though by saying that he does really want to keep some things there, to use later. There are things that you don’t want to forget. I think he could also be talking about the clutter that people tend to have, making our lives chaotic. Clutter made up of; everything from our work, our busy social schedules, the things that worry us, bills, and all the material possessions that one tends to accumulate in life. All of these things are taking up space in our lives, making them more hectic. And while the chaos can be overwhelming at times, even preventing us from progressing in life, sometimes it can be useful to tap into it and pull from it ideas, memories and new projects.
Monday, November 29, 2010
PAM curators & 50/50 exhibition
Pam Curators and the 50/50 Exhibition
I really enjoyed the 50/50 exhibition at the Portland Art Museum. Not necessarily for the works of art in the exhibition themselves, although they too were appealing, but rather the story behind the exhibition. I found it endearing and refreshing that all the works belonged to a modest couple in New York who had been collecting for decades. They were able to collect over 4,500 works of art on a modest income and stored them all in their small apartment. Their personalities came through in their collection within the pieces that they had, and the similarities between them. Their collection also said a lot about them by having many of the pieces been given to them personally by the artists themselves. They developed relationships with the artists and a name for themselves as collectors. It was interesting looking at the exhibition from the stand point of the curator. It was decided that the collection would be split up and divided into 50 pieces for 50 states. The pieces were randomly selected, after DC got their picks and then sent to museums around America. As the curator it was their job to figure out a way to display the works in a cohesive manor. The exhibition flowed like this; the first works to be displayed were those of more well known artists. Then it moved on to technique and process of making the art. The voice that sang out most from the collection was those of the collectors and their personalities along with the thought that most of the pieces wouldn’t have had the chance to be shown in such a way if not for them as well.
When were able to have one on one time and learn about everything that goes on and all the work involved in making exhibits and how the Portland Art Museum operates I was astounded by all the efforts. I didn’t know the time, money and science that goes into making the Portland Art Museum what it is. They already have exhibitions planned two years in advance, and they cost millions to bring to actuality. There is science behind the lighting, the temperature and the wall color. And they even pay attention to tribe affiliation and wishes when it comes to Native American exhibitions. One thing that was said that really stuck with me was, “curators do more than just hang up art work with a hammer and a nail. The should be called preservers, because that’s what they do. They Preserve art.” I thought that was really neat and encapsulated all that a curator does.
I really enjoyed the 50/50 exhibition at the Portland Art Museum. Not necessarily for the works of art in the exhibition themselves, although they too were appealing, but rather the story behind the exhibition. I found it endearing and refreshing that all the works belonged to a modest couple in New York who had been collecting for decades. They were able to collect over 4,500 works of art on a modest income and stored them all in their small apartment. Their personalities came through in their collection within the pieces that they had, and the similarities between them. Their collection also said a lot about them by having many of the pieces been given to them personally by the artists themselves. They developed relationships with the artists and a name for themselves as collectors. It was interesting looking at the exhibition from the stand point of the curator. It was decided that the collection would be split up and divided into 50 pieces for 50 states. The pieces were randomly selected, after DC got their picks and then sent to museums around America. As the curator it was their job to figure out a way to display the works in a cohesive manor. The exhibition flowed like this; the first works to be displayed were those of more well known artists. Then it moved on to technique and process of making the art. The voice that sang out most from the collection was those of the collectors and their personalities along with the thought that most of the pieces wouldn’t have had the chance to be shown in such a way if not for them as well.
When were able to have one on one time and learn about everything that goes on and all the work involved in making exhibits and how the Portland Art Museum operates I was astounded by all the efforts. I didn’t know the time, money and science that goes into making the Portland Art Museum what it is. They already have exhibitions planned two years in advance, and they cost millions to bring to actuality. There is science behind the lighting, the temperature and the wall color. And they even pay attention to tribe affiliation and wishes when it comes to Native American exhibitions. One thing that was said that really stuck with me was, “curators do more than just hang up art work with a hammer and a nail. The should be called preservers, because that’s what they do. They Preserve art.” I thought that was really neat and encapsulated all that a curator does.
collateral matters @MCC
Upon first entering the exhibit, my first instinct was to reach out and start touching and navigating through the paperwork that was neatly hanging in slip covers along the first two walls. It is a know fact, that in most museums, the displays and works are off limits to the curiosity of your fingers, and so I only quickly flipped through a few pages after noticing my fellow classmates were doing the same. After listening to Kate Bingaman and Clifton Burt speak about the exhibit that they collaborated on, everything made sense. The exhibit called for interaction. Everything was intentional from the way things were hung, to the time line on the far wall of the exhibit. They wanted the visitor to have a similar experience to the one they had when going through the paperwork and collateral trying to figure out how they were going to put together the exhibition. They thoughtfully picked out the most interesting pieces from each file and ordered them in chronological order and placed each individual paperwork in each individual case in a cover slip and then hung them together on a orange clip board. These hung all over two whole walls. Each one telling a story. On the far wall was a time line, spanning from the 1940’s to the 1980’s. Having the collateral from the different eras lined up in juxtaposition called attention to the changes that were taking place due to advancement in technology and society. In the 40’s the collateral was small, imageless and painstakingly hand written or typed on a typewriter. Further along the time line images start appearing, works start to get larger, there becomes a focus on the artist and color appears. The time line ends in the 80’s because collateral takes a turn as the world starts to get logged into the web. After Kate and Clifton finish speaking and give us free range to play and explore I tried out the type writer, making a spelling error in almost every sentence, while others practiced their penmanship at the stationary station and some read through the clips boards or other collateral story lines behind the glass panels. The fascinating thing about this exhibit is that it calls your attention to all the unseen work that goes on behind an exhibit that makes it actually happen. It shows the changes of our society, from single handedly writing every resume one did and snail mail to looking at where our society stands now with all our technological advances. The exhibit shows the hard work of the people behind the scenes and brings them into the foreground, who would have never guessed that what they were doing would be looked at as a form of art within itself. These collections of collateral should be appreciated for their stories and personalities, for the work and the time that is represented by all the many, many pieces of paperwork. They give a look into people’s lives and of our society’s past that is seemingly being replaced with e-mail, internet and monotone Times New Roman. It’s not that, how we do behind the scenes today is bad, indeed it’s quite quick and handy, but rather our past should be appreciated and thoughtfully perused.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)