1. Do you agree or disagree with Elkin's stance on art education? Explain?
For the most part yes. Some things can't be taught, but it doesn't mean education is pointless.
2. Explain your understanding of Elkin's definition of "taught"
I think he uses it to describe a way in which someone learns a specific skill.
3. How does structure within academia foster or inhibit the creation of art?
Obviously this is subjective, but for me, I think it has helped me be more confident showing my work, and experimenting with different things.
4. Do you think that art can be taught? Do you agree with the weak view of nothing can be taught, pgs 101-‐102?
I think things cant be learned, but the teacher will never teach the student exactly what he/she intended to.
1. Do you feel Ringling has prepared you for when you're working outside of a structured academic setting? Why?
I think Ringling has not done that for me, but I have tried to work on that for myself.
2. In relation to “Why Art Cannot Be Taught”, do you think that my work could have been made during a more traditional style of
teaching? Does innovative teaching lead to non-‐traditional work?
I really cannot answer this question.
3. Do you think that compared to your peers in this academic setting that you are successful? What about the academic setting do you
think has caused a major shift in my work in the last year, i.e. more freedoms leading to faster advances?
I think I am successful compared to my peers.
4. Do you think that art practice being taught through an academic setting which is structured by materials (painting class, sculpture class,
printmaking, etc) helped or hindered my using non traditional mediums to make art objects, ex: candy? Why or why not? What about in
your own work? What would you like to alter about your academic experience?
I think classes have been pretty open from the start, despite the structure the administration places on them. I think if you felt hindered, it was probably your on presuppositions that lead you to make decisions.
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
Brittney's Questions
Questions:
1. What, if any, are the similarities/differences of a slow,
meditative medium such as drawing/painting compared to an instant
appropriation tool such as photography? Would you consider a
photograph an object, as you would a painting/sculpture?
Although drawing and painting focus on composition, I think that the edges of the frame are the most dominant things to consider within the practice of drawing. I think, because it is quick, you can produce more images, and allow chance to effect the work.
2. What is the “message” of a photographic record?
I think that would depend on the image.
3. Would you consider “amateurism” when using a medium, an advantage
or a disadvantage, while producing work? For example, is
photo-realistic drawing the top of the heap? Does that
knowledge/technique get in the way of some-sort of innocence/potential
for inspiration?
For me, I think it is a disadvantage.
4. In the film, The Blood of a Poet by Jean Cocteau, what
images/sequences of voyeurism appear in the film? Does this have a
relationship to photography as appropriation?
The images of peeking through keyholes suggest voyeurism.
5. What does it mean psychologically when the theatre party applauds
the death of the card shark? What does it mean, when viewing it as an
artist?
I guess it seems ironic to laugh at the death of anything, but I don't take it too seriously because I don't think there is anything wrong with it.
6. At what time does a highly personal, private, disgusting or elegant
moment or event, becomes a spectacle? (Please refer to # 4 & #5)
The moment you make it public.
7. (Made in 1930) Jean Cocteau uses several surrealistic motifs
throughout the film, which is simultaneously intermixed with personal
iconography. What about my work is self referential, and at the same
time referencing the time in which we are living?
You are photographing personal events and people you know, and simply because of that, they refer to contemporary life.
8. Over the past two years, I have produced an extensive archive of
images, with 35mm film only. What do you consider to be the
differences between shooting in a digital format, and any sort of film
format?
There are many differences, such as how it looks, the process, and the way we think about it.
9. What are your observed advantages for me using photographic processes?
You are able to capture images that happen in the moment, and can obtain so many of them.
10. How hot is Lee Miller?
Pretty hot.
1. What, if any, are the similarities/differences of a slow,
meditative medium such as drawing/painting compared to an instant
appropriation tool such as photography? Would you consider a
photograph an object, as you would a painting/sculpture?
Although drawing and painting focus on composition, I think that the edges of the frame are the most dominant things to consider within the practice of drawing. I think, because it is quick, you can produce more images, and allow chance to effect the work.
2. What is the “message” of a photographic record?
I think that would depend on the image.
3. Would you consider “amateurism” when using a medium, an advantage
or a disadvantage, while producing work? For example, is
photo-realistic drawing the top of the heap? Does that
knowledge/technique get in the way of some-sort of innocence/potential
for inspiration?
For me, I think it is a disadvantage.
4. In the film, The Blood of a Poet by Jean Cocteau, what
images/sequences of voyeurism appear in the film? Does this have a
relationship to photography as appropriation?
The images of peeking through keyholes suggest voyeurism.
5. What does it mean psychologically when the theatre party applauds
the death of the card shark? What does it mean, when viewing it as an
artist?
I guess it seems ironic to laugh at the death of anything, but I don't take it too seriously because I don't think there is anything wrong with it.
6. At what time does a highly personal, private, disgusting or elegant
moment or event, becomes a spectacle? (Please refer to # 4 & #5)
The moment you make it public.
7. (Made in 1930) Jean Cocteau uses several surrealistic motifs
throughout the film, which is simultaneously intermixed with personal
iconography. What about my work is self referential, and at the same
time referencing the time in which we are living?
You are photographing personal events and people you know, and simply because of that, they refer to contemporary life.
8. Over the past two years, I have produced an extensive archive of
images, with 35mm film only. What do you consider to be the
differences between shooting in a digital format, and any sort of film
format?
There are many differences, such as how it looks, the process, and the way we think about it.
9. What are your observed advantages for me using photographic processes?
You are able to capture images that happen in the moment, and can obtain so many of them.
10. How hot is Lee Miller?
Pretty hot.
Paul's Q's
1. Is the author of this book being overly simplistic?
I think this subject would be impossible to accurately talk about through generalizations, which is what I think he is doing, so yes.
2. Is the author being overly cynical?
I think he is disgruntled, and I don't think all people experience art school the way he is describing it.
3. Can you be cynical and paranoid and still be correct in your assertions concerning matters that are highly subjective?
I think you can be cynical and paranoid and have an opinion. Whether that opinion is correct is the opinion of everyone else.
4. Since "group think" is not only entrenched in the art world but the real world, should it not be encouraged in art school?
I think people should be encouraged to find their own interests, not to mimic what will bring financial success.
5. Does the fine arts department at Ringling College of Art and Design represent a microcosm of the Art World?
I think it attempts to do that.
6. As stated in the reading "does privileging words over visual expression encourage a narrowly didactic approach to art making?"
I think language is just another way to approach art, but it is not the art.
7. Is Automatism or any other intuitive approach discouraged in contemporary art academia?
I don't think it is discouraged, but I do think it is expected that we talk about it even if it is approached intuitively.
8. Do you believe my work would have been better served had I not attended art college?
I don't know what your work was like before you came here, but it seems that you are making more work that you are more interested in, so I would think that is a good thing.
9. Do you believe my work to be self indulgent?
I think art is self indulgent, so yes.
10. If all art is self indulgent to a certain extent, should I not embrace this approach?
Most activities are self indulgent, but I think art serves more of a purpose once it is made because it effects other people.
11. Does the "it's all about me" approach to my work alienate you the viewer?
I think that some may feel alienated, but all communication is alienating. We all must make our own meaning from things.
I think this subject would be impossible to accurately talk about through generalizations, which is what I think he is doing, so yes.
2. Is the author being overly cynical?
I think he is disgruntled, and I don't think all people experience art school the way he is describing it.
3. Can you be cynical and paranoid and still be correct in your assertions concerning matters that are highly subjective?
I think you can be cynical and paranoid and have an opinion. Whether that opinion is correct is the opinion of everyone else.
4. Since "group think" is not only entrenched in the art world but the real world, should it not be encouraged in art school?
I think people should be encouraged to find their own interests, not to mimic what will bring financial success.
5. Does the fine arts department at Ringling College of Art and Design represent a microcosm of the Art World?
I think it attempts to do that.
6. As stated in the reading "does privileging words over visual expression encourage a narrowly didactic approach to art making?"
I think language is just another way to approach art, but it is not the art.
7. Is Automatism or any other intuitive approach discouraged in contemporary art academia?
I don't think it is discouraged, but I do think it is expected that we talk about it even if it is approached intuitively.
8. Do you believe my work would have been better served had I not attended art college?
I don't know what your work was like before you came here, but it seems that you are making more work that you are more interested in, so I would think that is a good thing.
9. Do you believe my work to be self indulgent?
I think art is self indulgent, so yes.
10. If all art is self indulgent to a certain extent, should I not embrace this approach?
Most activities are self indulgent, but I think art serves more of a purpose once it is made because it effects other people.
11. Does the "it's all about me" approach to my work alienate you the viewer?
I think that some may feel alienated, but all communication is alienating. We all must make our own meaning from things.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)