Subversive Signs by Hal Foster - Response

Subversive Signs by Hal Foster - Response

Quote:

“[…]: each treats the public space, social representation or artistic language in which he or she intervenes as both a target and a weapon.  This shift in practice entails a shift in position: the artist becomes a manipulator of signs more than a producer of art objects, and the viewer an active reader of messages rather than a passive contemplator of the aesthetic or consumer of the spectacular” (Foster 1066). 

Response:

Reading this portion of Hal Foster’s Subversive Signs beautifully sums up his point of view on the refinements of art style in traditional and (post)modernist properties, form and aesthetic.  The artist may be the creator of something, but they are actually manipulators of form.  In one sense of the term, artists typically work with solidified themes and tweak them to create their own messages and images in their artwork.  They put a voice into the visual world of art.  Apart from how a piece of art is read, manipulation comes into play even in the visual (visceral) form of a work of art.  Take a (clay) sculpture for example, its base begins with a block of clay - which to some could already be considered a piece of art - and that block of clay is manipulated by the artist which in turn becomes an artwork.  Building on that notion, many things are considered when creating a work of art.  Most importantly, art speaks differently and is interpreted in many ways when it is in different environments and that is a very important thing to keep in mind.  Apart from that, it is increasingly important to consider the viewer of the art.  They are the active readers, or at least they should be, rather than the passive viewers.  There are many things to consider in the art world - changing notions and shifts in the understanding of aesthetic and form - resulting in how an art piece will be understood and received by its viewers.  

Questions:

1. Is the cultural shift in refinement of style and innovative form a reflection of our society and our infatuation on “new and exciting things”?  The big topic that comes to mind with this makes me think of technology and how everything needs to get better and better; we are never satisfied.  Does that have parallels to the argument of style refinement in art?
2. Is the art world branching out to the outer most limits of expression?
3. At such a pivotal changing point in the world of art, is art becoming a more accessible medium through the openness of conceptual critique and our every day life?

Opponents, Audiences, Constituencies, and Community by Edward Said - Response

Opponents, Audiences, Constituencies, and Community by Edward Said - Response

Quote:

“…we need to think about breaking out of the disciplinary ghettos in which as intellectuals we have been confined, to reopen the blocked social processes ceding objective representation (hence power) of the world to a small coterie of experts and their clients, to consider that the audience for literacy is not a closed circle of three thousand professional critics but the community of human beings living in society, and to regard social reality in a secular rather than a mystical mode, despite all the protestations about realism and objectivity” (Said 1087).

Response:

The thing that stood out most to me in this reading was the notion Edward Said brought up about confinement in the interpretation of the art world.  Art, including writing, images, and three-dimensional forms are incredible means of communication and storytelling - so to speak.  Art is made for society when it is found in museums and the open world; it should not, in that respect, be closed off to interpretation for everyone other than a closed group of “professional” critics.  Other members of society can come to their own conclusions about what they see and how they perceive artworks, and anything else for that matter.  It should not, therefore, be an exclusive group of people who have the “end all, be all” statements about art.  I think that we, as a whole, are getting closer to making art more “open-source” so to speak.  However, that solution can become a tricky situation too.  There is a fine line regarding interpretation of works in the art world;  if everyone is making their own interpretations, then the voice of the author/artists can sometimes be overshadowed.  The question of interpretation of art should not be taken lightly; of course it can and should be open for more interpretation out of the professional critics realm, but not open enough to make it incredibly open-source.

Questions:

1. How can the politics of interpretation be closed off to such a small group of people?  Interpretation is open to everyone; not just the well educated and ones who’s voices are more prominent.  
2. Again, referring to the closed off group of interpreters, does it not seem that it puts a great deal of stress on aspiring artists and learners?  How much more rich would the art world be with more open interpretation to art?
3. “One must refuse to believe, however, that the comforts of specialized habits can be so seductive as to keep us all in our assigned places” (Said 1088).  Does that not seem difficult to achieve when there are secular groups of thought and that recurring theme of closed off interpretation of art?

Peer Review - From Exene

http://xpnd-dng.tumblr.com/post/109516428693/peer-review-robert-chapman


Writing is on:

The Couple in The Cage contributed by Elisabeth Ginsberg - Response

Peer Review - Exene Epperson

Peer Review - Exene Epperson

Review of fellow, wonderful student and friend, Exene Epperson.

Exene’s Quote: (The Impossible Image)

“The prime importance to me is beauty. Beauty is one of this main lines to make people feel something. It’s the sharpest tool in the box. If you’re trying to make people feel something, if you’re able to make it beautiful, then they’ll sit up and listen. And often if you make something that’s derived from human suffering or from war, and you represent that with beauty- and sometimes it is beautiful- it creates an ethical problem in the viewer’s mind. And so then they’re like confused and angry and disoriented- and this is great because you got them to actually think about the active perception and how this imagery is produced and consumed.”

My Thoughts:

Exene, your words are wonderful on Richard Mosse’s, The Impossible Image!  You brought up some really great points and had a great reading into the deeper meaning of the quote and I can really appreciate that.  Even if I had not already known your enjoyment of The Enclave, I can tell from your writing that you are very connected to it.  It was nicely written with personal experiences while having universal undertones.  This made it more interesting and relatable in my mind, while keeping a serious and professional undertone to your writing. 

I also like how you brought up other viewpoints that others may have on the project and how it has caused some controversy in it being a political art piece or simply the latter (just an art piece).  It can spark good conversation along with all of your other great questions.  

“It will be as bright in our minds as it was in that dark room.”

Your final words left me thinking even more about The Enclave and it is a great way to finish up your thoughts.  I think that we can both agree that we are going to revisit the exhibit more and get even more out of it.  

Overall, your writing is wonderful, keep it up, and I would love to see more posts from you!  Your writings are always really nice.

The Couple In The Cage contributed by Elisabeth Ginsberg - Response

The Couple In The Cage contributed by Elisabeth Ginsberg - Response

Quote:

“Despite their intent to create an over-the-top satirical commentary on Western concepts of the exotic, primitive Other, it turned out that a substantial portion of the audience believed in the authenticity of the Guatinauis” (Ginsberg).

Response:

This project is very interesting to me.  To think that a good portion of all of the people who saw this “exhibit” took what they saw as true is borderline baffling to me.  I would imagine that someone who was well educated would see, or put more research into the people of Guatinau and realize that they do not exist.  I feel like people who saw this exhibit may have questioned who these people are, and how they could have been overlooked for so long in society.  However, I think that people took their “authenticity” as true because of the lack of knowledge and possible discrimination that would ensue if they declared “they never existed”.  It would have become a slippery slope to tread and that is a rational reason, at least to me, why viewers believed the Guatinauis.  The background information was all there; it was backed up and seemed incredibly legitimate.  It would be hard to question all of those “facts” and information. 

This project kind of reminds me of the notions in the movie, The Truman Show.  Jim Carry is essentially living a lie; the world around him is watching a TV show about his life and he has no idea about it - casually going about his day.  He doesn’t really question it and takes it for what it is.  The notions of truth and authenticity, also make me think of an episode of the cartoon,  Invader Zim.  In an episode, the Character, Dib, is profiled and finds out that his whole life is a lie/fabrication and it is simulated by the main character, Zim.  The whole show overall reminds me of this exhibit; it is all based off a lie.  Zim is convinced that he is on a mission on Earth throughout the whole series, when really, he isn’t.  He is also posing as a human when he is really an alien.  Overall, there are many ties to pop culture in The Couple and The Cage and it is very applicable and found in many themes.

Questions:

1. Is this satirical commentary poking fun at Western understanding of exotic concepts?  
2. Does this notion actually make the West seem like an uncultured group of people, unaware of other cultures in the world?  Does it make them seem gullible as well?
3. Is it possible that people were entirely convinced the Guatinauis did not exist, yet they did not say anything out of fear of discrimination?  
4. Who is to say that history is also riddled with groups such as the Guatinauis?  Are there more fabrications?

Art Theory by Cynthia Freeland (Ch. 3) - Response

Art Theory by Cynthia Freeland (Ch. 3) - Response

Quote:

“In the modern world, no culture, however ‘primitive’ and remote, remains isolated” (Freeland 42).

Response:

I believe what Cynthia Freeland is trying to say is that in this day and age we are more connected than ever before; we know incredibly more information about everything.  Whether we as a society recognize it or not, we are influenced by the cultures within our country as well as the countries and cultures outside of ours - expanding far and wide.  The notion that “no culture is isolated” poses some trouble to me.  For one, I believe that America in particular is unaware of many other cultures as a whole.  Although we pride ourselves for being a very diverse country, many of us have no idea what other cultures are truly like unless we have spent time in those areas personally.  We may also collectively “know” a great deal of information about another culture, but as stated before it is one thing to actually experience it first hand, rather than read about it or see a piece of art from there.  That goes hand in hand with knowing more about the art and other rituals that come from that country.  For that reason many things, although we may be very well read on the culture, will feel alien or foreign to us. 

I believe that the notion “Culture travels, like people” (Freeland 41), communicates well with the quote above.  It generally states that cultures experience change and “take” things from other cultures that they implement into their own.  From this communication, or passing of information, many cultures find their ways into others and become less isolated, for they share common qualities/customs.

Questions:

1. If art is such a great window into another culture and their customs, rituals and beliefs, how can it be too simple of an idea while still being an attractive notion?
2. If every innovation or art form is influenced by another, what is the original form and was it influenced by anything?
3. What is the true art form?  Is there any art that classical, modern, and postmodern tendencies sprout from and are inspired by?
4. Could it be argued that some countries, so vast and foreign to most other countries, have gone almost untouched culturally?

Alms Dealers: Can You Provide Humanitarian Aid Without Facilitating Contact? By Philip Gourevitch - Response

Alms Dealers: Can You Provide Humanitarian Aid Without Facilitating Contact? By Philip Gourevitch 

Quote:

Polman - “Sowing horror to reap aid, and reaping aid to sow horror, she argues, is “logic of the humanitarian era” (Gourevitch 5).

Response:

On my first reading of the text, Alms Dealers: Can You Provide Humanitarian Aid Without Facilitating Contact?  By Philip Gourevitch, I found that Polman’s words were quite thought provoking.  I found myself repeating her words in my head and sticking with me since the reading.  It makes so much sense in this day and era while humanitarian aid has become such a reflexive concept.  There are many sides to the argument of aid being beneficial or a hindrance to countries involved.  On the surface, humanitarian aid can be great for a country in need; they receive food and goods, help building a government system (if needed), and a way for the citizens to make money and become more self-sustainable and self sufficient.  On the other hand, humanitarian aid can be a bad thing.  When thousands of people come in to “help” a nation in need, many citizens are left confused, displaced, and/or lost.  More often than not, the humanitarian groups are there as a logo, rather than an actual group of people trying to help.  I think that adds to the conundrum of spreading horror to receive aid, and receiving aid to spread horror.  There is a disconnect in that respect too with the cause and the people involved; that is why humanitarian aid can become a volatile notion. The lack of aftercare when the situation is “solved” or has come to a “resolution”, coupled with the  infatuation of media coverage on the subject prove to conclude that humanitarian aid is not 100% good or bad.  It is a catch-22 in many ways.

Questions:

1. Can other entities sought out as being good and just (various non-profits, etc) also be unjust and a hindrance to making things better?
2. Why is the obvious choice in Western thought to default to humanitarian problem solving?  Is it something for Westerners to feel good about; to feel like they are “helping”?
3. How is it that humanitarian aid can do more harm more than it does good?  An entity founded completely on the goodwill of nations and relief work seem like they would get many good things done rather than the bad. 

Artist Questions - Responsibilities

Artists and Their Viewers 

1. What is the artist’s responsibility in making a work of art?

I believe the artist’s responsibility in creating a work of art would include a few ground rules that most all artists would agree upon.  Personally, I would have to say that originality is a huge part for the artist.  If an artist takes an idea or outright copies another artist that would be very disrespectful, for one, and illegal.  Regarding originality and Renzo Martens’ Enjoy Poverty, I think that it was a general idea but the execution of it is what took the cake.  The way that Martens included the neon light sign that stated “Enjoy poverty please” (even though I did not personally enjoy it) was quite original in its own respect.  Switching the scope to my project, I feel that I can possibly get onto a slippery slope of becoming too ironic or bringing the serious tones out of my project, thus making the video more of an advertisement or stereotypical piece of art.  Originality is key, otherwise pieces will not feel fresh and repeated. 

I think it is important for an artist to be intentional too, in more ways than one.  For one, they need to be intentional in their message with or without a disclaimer so to speak.  In both Martens’ and my project, I think that there is a pretty clear message and the intentions in our crafts are present and meaningful in their own respects.  Other than having a meaningful, intentional message, a huge responsibility is having intention in one’s ideas and execution of them.  A well thought out execution of material and mediums in the art world can make or break the meaning, story, and feel of a work of art. 

Lastly, it is extremely important for the artist to think about their viewers.  They should think about who is going to potentially see their work, how their messages are going to be perceived, and how they want the viewer to interact with the piece.  If an artist is not thinking about their viewer and/or aiming towards the incorrect audience, it is not going to be as meaningful or understood; and that is essential.  For me at least, I think that is what Martens’ documentary was lacking, it felt confused in who it was aimed for especially.  If a disconnect is created, the art is not living up to what it could truly be. 

2)   What is the responsibility of the viewer?

Much like the responsibility of the artist, there is a reflexive responsibility for the viewer as well.  I think that it is important for the viewer to treat an artist’s work with respect and not just “blow it off”, especially if the artist did everything in their power to reach their audience, express a message, and show their intentions well.  With all of those qualities, it is hard for a viewer to pass it up and not respect it anyhow.  For a viewer to give an art piece a chance and actually “read” it, it is responsibility enough for them.  It is when they perceive it and expand upon it that an interest is found in the art itself.  Regarding Martens’ and Mosse’s projects in the DRC, I would also say that it is important for the viewer to understand that Mosse and Martens did not, and do not want people to go there and actually do something directly.  They would rather bring the problem out of the shadows and into the minds of the masses.  Although the viewer does not have as many “responsibilities” as the artist per-say, it is important for them (the viewers) to realize that the art is put out there by the artist and it should be treated with respect for what it is worth (intrinsically and monetary).

Enjoy Poverty: Disclosing the Political Impasse of Contemporary Art - By Renzo Martens - Response

Enjoy Poverty: Disclosing the Political Impasse of Contemporary Art - By Renzo Martens - Response

In conversation with Niels Van Tomme

Quote:

RM “Art uses its own existence to dismantle the world” (Martens 270).

Response:

Renzo Martens’ statement on art being able to dismantle the world posed to be an interesting statement that really stuck with me after the reading.  At first, I read Martens’ statement literally, and it took me aback.  Before the reading, I did not give much thought to the concept of art “dismantling the world”.  I have always known that art is an incredibly powerful medium in getting a message across to someone, but to think about it dismantling the world makes a lot of sense from what Martens, and Richard Mosse for that matter, have to say.  Art can get to the core of things that many other means of expression cannot.  It takes concepts and things we already know and makes us question those ideals, beliefs, and modes of thought more often than not.  In short, I interpret what Martens is trying to say is that art has the ability to forge new paths and change the construct of how the world thinks, and that is an incredible feat.

Reflecting on this even more, I think that Martens’ statement can instill a great sense of fear in the mind of an artist and viewers of art alike.  The artist has this ability to change constructs and ways we think about things and the viewer/society is left to interpret that change.  The artist is the needle and society is the thread, together they mend or create new ideas and change old ones, making us more aware of the world that we live in. 

Questions:

1. When does art become more political than a body of work?  What defines it as political?  Why do people rarely use art for political ramifications?
2. Are there limits or boundaries to aesthetic?  If so, what are those limits and boundaries?
3. How can the existence of art dismantle the world?

Immorality As Ethics: Renzo Marten’s Enjoy Povery - Response

Immorality As Ethics: Renzo Marten’s Enjoy Povery - Response

Quote:

“When an artist devotes himself solely ‘to the good cause’ and neglects his artistic and intellectual qualities there will be little scope for criticism and analysis” (De Roo 142)

Response:

I find that this quote is a good representation of extreme devotion in any field being an issue.  It is great for one to have a large amount of enthusiasm for a project and devote themselves to it, but when crucial aspects such as the aesthetics of a piece and the basic intellectual qualities are missing, one cannot really dissect it and analyze it.  There can be a wonderful message, but if it is not backed up with enough concrete artistic qualities, it is lost in translation.  I find that this is one of the most difficult things for an artist to overcome in developing their own voice.  It may be a noble thing to focus solely on the cause, or greater good in a sense, but when it comes to creating something artistic in relation to it, it is definitely important to consider other qualities as well.  So many crucial things can be missed when all things are not taken into consideration and it is a shame that some messages can go unanswered, so to speak.  In my relatively short time of considering myself an “artist” I have had some troubles with this issue.  I tend to be very meticulous with my works, but it is very easy to forget the artistic and intellectual qualities and focus more on the message and ‘the good cause’.  There is always a limit to the devotions one has to certain aspects of a project, and it is up to the artist to find those limits and restrictions in creating striking pieces of art.

Questions:

1) Why is it that Western ethics are so narcissistic?  Is it a good thing that Enjoy

Poverty breaks the pattern of us feeling good and leaving us uncomfortable?

2) Do artists such as Renzo Martin and Richard Mosse have trouble with hitting

the correct emotional chords for people who see there work?  (e.g. Not wanting their viewers to take direct action in the issues they depict.)

3) “A truth is formed” (De Roo 144).  Would it be correct to say that truths are   learned, or are they intrinsically found in ourselves?

Proposal - I Might End Up Changing This...

Homelessness in Portland, Oregon (Homelessness in General)

https://www.portlandoregon.gov/phb/60643

http://www.kgw.com/story/news/2014/07/26/12578544/

http://nationalhomeless.org

Homelessness is a huge issue that spans across all walks of life and around the world.  Thousands of people in the Portland area alone are either in transitionary living situations (where they do not have a house and are in a shelter at night) or are sleeping on the streets, completely homeless.  Many people are denied entrance into shelter facilities if they are in possession of alcohol and or drugs, or have mental illnesses (in some instances).  During the winter especially, these people are left incredibly cold and their illnesses become much worse (Schizophrenic patients/sufferers have much worse symptoms in the winter).  They cannot get help for their issues until horrible things happen beforehand.  It is so very disappointing to see that the very people that live in our city are put on the back burner and literally forgotten.  We are all so caught up in our day to day routine that we forget about the people that truly need help in our society.  

Even people who are working full time jobs at minimum wage have trouble just getting by and having a roof above their heads; what is that saying about society?

My Project Idea 

My project idea is to create a short video (2:30 min at most) that profiles the homelessness in Portland.  This project has incessantly been on my mind since it was assigned, and I was excited to hear that a video project could be an option.  Much like Richard Mosse and his work in The Enclave, I plan to create a video that makes people even more aware of the homelessness in our nation (but using Portland as my scope).  Rather than making it “political-style” with text, images, and facts/figures throughout the video, I want to just have videos from simple walks that I take around the city and in certain areas where homelessness is very dense  (that I am aware of and research/discover).  

Getting into more detail about the video: 

Beginning: I am aware of a homeless man in Pioneer Courthouse Square that is there most every day and evening yelling, “If anyone could spare, just a little change…” and goes on saying that.  I plan to start the video with no video, just that recording and a black screen.  After that fades out I plan to start the videos and have a light soundtrack that is playing with it (Much like The Enclave).  I do not intend to have any dialogue or sound other than the soundtrack and maybe some foley sounds (that I record) of the city and perhaps any other prolific sounds that strike me.  I do not intend to end the video with any text, credits, title, anything.  It would make much more of a statement in my mind.  Choosing a soundtrack will be hard, I do not want it to be empowering/cheery (to make us want to do something about this), and I don’t want it to be so depressing that it makes people feel horrible for watching it (e.g. ASPCA commercials).  I want to have a neutral soundtrack that makes people stop and just watch it, and get informed on the issue/have it become known. 

Works Cited

NCH, . "Building a Movement to End Homelessness." National Homeless. National Coalition for the Homeless, Ongoing. Web. 18 Jan. 2014.

Oregon, Portland. "Ending Homelessness." The City Of Portland, Oregon. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Jan. 2014.

Staff, KGW. "Who are Portland's Homeless?." Kgw News Channel 8. NBC, Web. 25 May 2014.

(Whoops! Forgot To Post This!) Richard Mosse: The Impossible Image - Response

Quote:

“They had a very interesting reaction to the camera who was very ambivalent, and they didn't want to be photographed and they made it very clear.  So, it was this aggressive, sort of, face off with the camera - not with you but the lens.  But at the same time they were posing, the rebels became very gestural and performative, very expressive, in their poses. (…) The subject in the photograph is reminding the viewer of the authors presence” (Mosse).

Response:

I thought that the reactions to the camera was a very important point to bring up in the process of filming for The Enclave.  I found Mosse’s words were very thoughtful in the way that he described the camera as being this foreign device that perhaps frightened the people at first and made them apprehensive.  I couldn’t imagine how the people of the DRC (The Rebels) would feel, seeing these people coming in to “help” them, yet they are all just getting filmed.  It is interesting though that they were intensely mad at the camera and not the cameraman themselves.  When they stared straight into the lens, it seemed to me that they may have indeed been looking at the cameraman, which ultimately made the images much more powerful to me.  I also find it interesting that the idea of the camera switched as they were filming, and as Mosse said, they began posing and exemplifying their movements for a better gesture.  It is almost as if they understood quite quickly what they were doing and followed suit in their actions.

Mosse’s words on the subjects in his photographs (and all photographs for that matter) having reflexive properties, reminding the viewer of the photographers presence was incredibly striking to me.  When the subject/person is staring straight into the lens, or “posing” for the camera, they are a part of a moment that is intrinsic to the people themselves, photographer, and viewer.  It is a chain of events that creates what the final image will be and how it is read.  

Questions:

1. Is there a set point where the progression of the video begins, or is it meant to be purely ambiguous, or up to the viewer?
2. Are the contrasting images of suffering and beauty meant to strike people as a means of life and death?  Can it have multiple meanings depending on the scope of one’s perception?
3. Does the presence of multiple screens parallel the fact that Richard Mosse is trying to envelop us into the world he was in and experienced?  How close can we get to the experience when we are looking just through the lens, or screen?

Christy Lang, “Richard Mosse: The Impossible Image.” Vimeo Video, 7:21 posted by

Frieze Film 2014

Infra - Photographs by Richard Mosse Essay by Adam Hochschild - Response

Quote:

“A nation with a lavish array of valuable raw materials but without a functioning government is like a child heiress without parents or guardian: everyone schemes for a piece of what she’s got” (Hochschild 121).

Response:

Although this quote is found very early on in the writing, it exemplifies the issue that has persisted, for what seems like an eternity, in the Congo.  I think that it is incredibly disgusting that countries, including the U.S., could ignore the issues that are going on with the people of the Congo and focus solely on the natural resources that can be gained from the country.  A country should not be a bargaining chip, or a means of bragging rights for another country.  Countries should be there for one another and help others that are in need.  It is disappointing to think that there are things like this that happen everyday that we are almost completely blind to.  If America and other countries are fighting so hard to get a piece of the Congo, why can't they start by going there and doing something to help the country instead of standing on the sidelines, waiting for them to figure something out?  We should not surround the country in scandal or more issues, rather make good connections and relations; maybe help the country get on their feet.  I hate to say it, but after making better relations, we can build a trade system with the country.  Again, I do not want to make it sound like Americans (or any other country for that matter) should just use the Congo as a means for their own resources, rather helping a country that is in dire need of help.

Questions:

1. How is it that something can being going on to this scale and magnitude that very few people actually know about it?  Are we all simply unaware or are we trying to be made unaware?
2. How could any nation, knowing the complexity of what is going on in the Congo, simply ignore the issue and “let things be”?
3. The notion of a country being “won” seems unethical to me; is there a complete disregard for the people that are living there?  Are countries that power-hungry and materialistic?

Infra essay by Adam Hochschild (Photographs by Richard Mosse)

A Supplement to The Enclave by Richard Mosse and Others - Response

A Supplement to The Enclave by Richard Mosse and Others - Response

Quote:

Trevor Tweeten “No.  Not at all.  It was intense… when you have the camera in front of you it becomes a sort of filter, a sort of force field that what you see through the lens ceases to be reality and so it doesn’t have the same impact” (Mosse 9).

Response:

The words of Trevor Tweeten really struck me when I first read the conversation between him and Richard Mosse.  Typically the camera is a means of documenting a moment, but it never fully sees, never fully captures what is going on outside of the frame.  Although there is an illusion to what is going on outside of the frame, it is never absolute or concrete - unless of course more photos are taken.  Even with all of the photos in the world, there will always be limits that exist.  Both the photo and photographer share this struggle.  Coming from a photographer, I experience the “filter-effect” that many photographers experience from time to time.  It is almost a time warp that occurs when I am shooting photos.  One minute I am photographing and the next, the day has almost come to an end.  Being behind the camera is a completely different experience than just taking “mental pictures” so to speak.  There is a definite separation from reality when looking through the lens.  There are so many things to be focusing on when you have a camera and viewfinder in front of your face that it takes away from the visceral experience, one that you could almost touch, that is unfolding before your eyes.  I think that is also a reason as to why we can never fully understand what it is like for people in crisis that we see on TV, see images of, and read about.  We are not there to experience all of the bodies senses or see with our own two eyes, our surroundings.  Seeing something on TV or reading about it will never replicate the firsthand experience of it, and that is the conflict that imaging/photography is trying to combat.

Questions:

1. Working with a meaningful medium, in this case the Kodak Aerochrome film, can make a piece of art “speak” much more than any other - and it sure does in this case.  It begs the question, what is the limit of working with such an unstable medium?  Although the medium fits this project so nicely, is the fragility of the film in the process worth it in the end?
2. Why is it that fear is what turns the world around? (as stated by Richard Mosse)  Are we driven by our fears?  That seems very negative to me, but quite possibly very true.
3. I feel as though, from reading this, that we have perceived the world in a completely different way than we should.  Does the disjointedness of sources and information from different sources make us blindingly unaware of what is really going on?  Should we experience what is going on in the real world without a filter and in the flesh?

A Supplement to The Enclave by Richard Mosse.  2014.  A Broken Dimanche Press Publication.  Print.

Interview With Mark Allen of Machine Works - Response

Interview With Mark Allen of Machine Works (Sarah Schultz Interview) - Response

Quote: 

“In life, there’s no guarantee what the outcome of 

an event or experience will be.  There’s always the possibility

that something will turn out to be not very good.  (…)  

I think that uncertainty generates a sense of possibility” (Allen 204).

Response:

Overall, I found it hard to choose just one quote that I could write about.  The words of Mark Allen resonate well with me.  I think that a lot of us, myself included, need to be more self aware and account for the failures that are bound to happen in life.  We are imperfect human beings attempting to make everything we do, everything we touch, a beautiful work of art, writing, or scholarly report as perfect and polished as possible.  Although that may be a good intention, we must also be aware of the fact that failure is an option; and that failure can be an exciting, positive thing.  Allen’s words on Open Field work in museums are a great example of promoting exposure to the development of an art piece and how anything, good or bad, can happen in that process.  Rather than viewing work that has been curated and hung in a museum, the viewer is also a part of the process of the piece.   “Work does not enter a museum until a bunch of people have decided it’s really good.  But in Open Field, things enter without anyone knowing if they’ll be good or not and sometimes without anybody knowing they're entering at all” (Allen 204).  The interaction between the artist and viewer is a very important part of the process of understanding art and its messages.  If people are able to see masters and professionals at their craft experience failures and successes, then it becomes this visceral piece of work that is more relatable to the viewer.  In short, I believe what Mark Allen is trying to say is that things are not always going to be what we want them to be, or how we want them to be read.  The uncertainty of it being a success is an exciting experience to be a part of, and that can only happen through Open Field work.

Questions:

                        1)   Should a museum be or become fully Open Field?  Would it become too chaotic?  (Transcending the barriers?)

2)  Would society benefit from seeing the professionals fail or make mistakes in their practice as well?  Through Open Field work, viewers are seeing every mark the artist makes and every potential mistake they are bound to make.  Would that bring interest to the work, make it more relatable, or give it more meaning to us?

3)  Could the uncertainty associated with Open Field work bring forth more inspiration and connection to art rather than a curated, static pieces in a museum?

Schultz, Sarah, Sarah Peters, and Susannah Bielak. Open Field: Conversations on the Commons. , 2012.

Failing By Design - Response

Failing By Design by Rita Gunther McGrath - Response

Quote:

“If you accept this premise, the choice before you is simple: Continue to use practices that limit what you can gain from failures—or embrace the concept of intelligent failure, in which learning can create substantial value. (…) Leaders must be willing to talk about failures and what was learned from them” (McGrath).

Response:

          We’ve all been there; we’ve seen failure and success in our lives, yet we sometimes beat ourselves up over various shortcomings in life.  Those failures and shortcomings, big or small, are very important if they are recognized and dealt with intelligently.  It is then that we can transcend the small bubbles we are trapped in that contain our fears and anxieties of failure.  We can then become bigger risk takers and intelligent thinkers and leaders.  In the reading, Failing By Design by Rita Gunther McGrath, I thought about failures in places other than big businesses and companies.  I feel that we as a society are taught at a very young age, especially in the school system, that failure is bad.  Yet, once we progress in the “school-system” so to speak, we learn that failures are always going to come.  So why is it that institutions, such as schools, continue to frown upon failure?  It is not helping children and young adults recognize the fact that intelligent failure can be a good thing.  If any of them want to run Fortune 500 businesses, they will need to experience failure in their life and if they cannot transform their mode of thought from failure being bad, to it being a positive means of growth, then they will not able to lead that company. It is very interesting to me, the culture shock of changing modes of thought.  You are taught that failure is detrimental to the educational journey, and it damn well shows on a transcript, further limiting a student.  Of course, if they are willing to embrace intelligent failure they will learn from their “mistake” and take more risks, but at what cost?  It is the fear of failure itself that limits what the mind can do and create.  Leaders of businesses as well as other individuals are always combating that notion and trying to overcome it, even though that very failure can sometimes be a good thing.

Questions:

    1) Why is it that failure is seen as important in the “real world” of technology, etc. when the same notion in the school system is frowned upon?  There is always going to be failure according to McGrath, if that happens in the school system (as a final grade for example) it is detrimental to the progression the student has, therefore limiting them.

2) How much failure is “too much failure”?  What denotes the limit of failure?  Is it different, say, in various fields?

3) It seems as though media dramatizes the notion of failure and successes of companies, for example, to almost polar opposite qualities - does that have an effect on how things are handled and the reputation of the company?  (e.g. Apple releasing a flop-product)

Failing By Design. By: McGrath, Rita Gunther, Harvard Business Review, 00178012,

Apr2011, Vol. 89, Issue 4