Line Kit

This line something-or-other was very interesting. Parts of the piece turned out very well and geometric almost looking ordered, and other parts we're just very displaced. The piece itself was well designed as the 'kit' because all of the lines connected. I am really interested in seeing the one Pat mentioned that was in the Corcoran, because this idea worked out very well. I'm kind of excited to make my conceptual piece (even though I will definately get stares and possibly even a few security guards asking questions).

The floor is made of lava!!!

We did performance art! I performed with Hernan doing Amanda's piece which was pretty cool. We each drew a line to connect to a picture, but at first it wasn't really anything, just lines. I found myself concentrating on doing swirly lines when he did straight lines, and trying to make the picture reach to other areas of the paper. After awhile we noticed we were kind of making a cube, and we started to build a church. We were able to share the same thoughts of the continuation of the image without verbally communicating with eachother.

Also, my piece:


was performed by Bart and Laura. I did the whole 'the floor is made of lava' modeled after a game I'd play when I was little. Move from one side of the room to the other without touching the floor, just using tables, chairs, etc. Unfortunately, the room wasn't ideal for this, because it's really just two big tables and a small gap in between with chairs. They were still able to use the chairs between it. My purpose in the piece was to make the performers more conscious about their surroundings, balance, and planning ahead their movement.

Performance Art

Unlike THE Performing Arts (theater etc), Performance Art deals with the act of performance and the sensations of the person involved. Theater and other similar art forms deal more with the audience and the overall look of the play. Theater is performed for the benefit of the audience and to get across a story and characters. Performance art is not concerned about an audience, as a lot of it is performed without one, nor a plot. It is concerned about the human reaction and sensations involved during the act. What does the performer pay attention to? What things does the performer do on "auto pilot" and take for granted as human behavior (like brushing teeth).

Playing with Behaviors of Everyday Life

I did the activity today with Vicky, and it was very strange. When walking with the mirror, I found myself more focused on keeping the mirror steady in order to see her than actually making the faces. I didn't think twice about the faces, i just did whatever my brain my told me to, but the only thing I was really concentrating on was keeping the mirror steady. I also realized I didn't pay much attention to my pace of walking, and found that at some points I couldn't even focus on Vicky's face through the mirror- not really sure why but I guess I was concentrating on keeping balance.
I don't really know what my expectations were, it all happened like I thought it would, but I didn't think about the action before I did it, just "O yes, so we'll see each other in the mirror. Ok let's go." I also didn't get any strange sensations like Kaprow wrote about his sensation when brushing his teeth. I was aware of the physics involved, and I just paid attention to keeping the mirror up. I didn't have some strange "wow I naturally do this" sensation. But I did realize how I go on "auto-pilot" with other directions (like the faces) and I do them without even paying attention to what I'm doing.

Pattern

Pattern is something found throughout history and cultures. It goes in and out of style with clothing, and is on floors and walls. Patterns are very pleasing to the eye (unless it is extmremely busy) and is found in almost everything. Most popular are floor tiles and clothing. Floor tiles are easy patterns because to make a floor look complete they should all be the same, and to avoid drawing attention from the rest of the room, they should be very basic. Clothing patterns can have different styles, colors, and different styles- allowing all groups of people to be drawn towards it. Perhaps patterns keep similarity and consistancy when people's lives usually don't.

Duchamp

I'll come out at say it: I don't like Duchamp. Never have, probably never will. His "Nude Descending a Staircase" was great, new, and really a great study of motion with modernism (which I'm not a huge fan of in the first place). A shovel as art? C'mon. I think I should just draw a dot on a piece of paper and try to see which gallery would support my "minimalist" art. I could come up with some kind of explanation of why it's great. But that doesn't make it art.

I don't like the Bride piece, and I don't think it should have this great acclaim. It's not that great. Yes, it's a fresh idea with the notes etc, and yes I can understand the movement and mechanics this is supposed to represent between the bride and bachelors and all the gases and machines. I can even accept that the "bride runs on love gasoline (a secretion of the bride's sexual glands)" because sex and the attraction between men and women really is a chemical thing. It's great that he uses that and expresses it through the mechanics (which wasn't his main focus, but thought he put into it). But I don't like it, and I don't think it's a great achievement.

It's not visual pleasing. In fact, there's nothing really visual about it. Like the article said, Duchamp "defines art primarily as a mental act rather than a visual one." Art should evoke emotion and thought and be very much mental, but visual components is a HUGE part of art and should be what brings around the mental part. This is not "Mental Concepts" this is "Visual Concepts." Art is (as in Duchamp's genre of art) is visual. Music can be art as well as many other things. But art is mostly visual. Monet's lilypads and gardens don't evoke some mental thought from me, or make people painstakingly flip through notes to understand it, it's visual pleasing. Art = visual. That's the problem I have with Duchamp. He tries to be too philosophical. He takes something no one would consider art and calls it art, and because he stands by it and can explain it, people think it's amazing. Well, that seems like a con artist to me.

People can dedicate their whole lives trying to determine the line between art and real life. All I know, is that may be "art", but its not good art. Not by the definitions and terms I grew up with.

Value Drawing (redo)

Forgot to post this- oops.

Doing the value scale wasn't too difficult. I did a rough sketch before i did it on the good piece of paper. I found that the differences in how much harder you have to draw is very minimal. I did my value scale kind of horn-shaped, and I think I did it successfully because at each step of he value, you see that little line of light and dark because of the contrast. My value drawing was a mix of different squares overlapping eachother. On most of the intersections, the contrasting lines were present. I used 5 different values. If I could redo it I would think about positive and negative space more, because I was more concentrated on getting the values together than the full composition.

Gestalt

(from http://www.gestaltqueensland.org.au/gestalt_approach.htm)

Gestalt is a form of therapy/ psychology using positive and negative space. The patient is examined by which forms they see first and more clearly in the image. In the above image, the positive space forms a vase, while the negative space forms two faces. The positive and negative space both evoke a different image.

Value Drawing

Camera made it a little odd- but I used a really light shade so it's hard to show up.

Silly String

In class on Thursday we made this pretty cool string installation. It was defintately different than anything I've done in another class, but it was fun. I guess it was a mock Duchamp's string installation- though his looks a little more planned. All I can say is I wouldn't like to be the one to take his installation down. The one we did in class was hard enough to get untangled- but luckily mine wasn't too complicated except for the brief time I went into the Tangle-of-Death.

I've been having a little trouble with the 4 part geometric/organic line and shape assignment. Not that it's really that difficult, but I keep second guessing myself. I keep concentrating on shape and neg/pos space and wanting to keep unity and rhythm, and I guess focusing too much because I'm never happy with anything I've been producing. I've finally gotten something I guess I'll have to live with, I've never done anything like this before- I'm used to taking something already created and arranging it compositionally, not creating it from scratch.

Line > Shape

Line is never ending and has direction. It can be any width/height, and can be represented by any length. It can change thicknesses, overlap itself (like swirls) or change direction, but it is always constant.

Shape has a start and a finish, and is usually a complete object. Like a line that is connected at the tips so it has a start and finish, and usually has form and is solid.

Images A and B are lines. They both change thicknesses, and Image B changes direction also. They could be considered shapes (as most lines could) as outlined by shapes.

Images C and D are shapes but Image C could also be considered a line. Image D has no direction, and the thicknesses are too speratic to have it never ending or just be rapidly changing thicknesses. Image C could be considered a very thick line, or a basic shape. Image C is considered a line or shape based on the use and the belief of the viewer.

Analyze This

This piece has a mix of gray tones and vibrantly colored shapes. Most of the colored shapes have angled edges, while the majority of the grays are tranluscent circles mostly located on the right side of the piece. Some of the colored shapes border eachother, like they were connected. Also, some of the loose colored shapes have shadows (like the blue in the middle and red on white at the top left) but they are all different so there is no constant direction of light.

The mix of translucent circles resembles an expolusion or an orb bringing the other shapes towards it, and muttles the colored shapes around it. It is very chaotic, very destructive, and very busy. It suggests solid pieces of the vibrant color being blasted away into smaller pieces bring mixed through the air, but it's not scary or overwhelming becase of the happy colors, the stillness of the pieces, and the soft and harmless look of the translucent circles.

I like the piece. There is a lot to look at without being overwhelming, visual flow from the connected colors up to the translucent "explosion", good color variation, and overall nice visual appearance. But it's very distracting that the shadows do not line up together, and there is no constant light direction.