1 year ago
Barthes’ essay predominately speaks from the position of literature. Translate the following terms into their visual arts equivalents: (i.e., Author = Artist)
writing- The emotion configured through contact with pen or pencil.
voice- What the artist represents.
language- The medium.
reader- The one who acknowledges and respects the work.
text- The art itself.
point of origin- The initial idea of the artist.
Near the end of the first paragraph Barthes’ says “writing is the
destruction of every voice, of every point of origin.” Paraphrase and
apply to artistic practice.
I think he is saying that each writing contains different meanings, if
you give an author a pen, he will write what he feels and he will no
longer voice those feelings in the same way. This applies to art in a a
similar way- If you give a painter a brush, he/she will use that brush
to paint what they feel rather than voicing similar feelings.
Consider the following quote:
The text is a tissue of quotations drawn from the innumerable centers of culture.
How is the text a “tissue of quotations”? - Every line of text is a reflection or a memory.
Whatmight it mean that the text is “drawn from innumerable centers of
culture”? - I think it means that is from multiple traditions or
sources.
What does this mean to you, as an artist?- It’s interesting… To me, it
means taht not everything you produce as art,comes from the same place.
Other people’s creativivity inspire artists. Dreams can inspire as
well. Brain storming and so forth… Just because a painter paints,
doesn’t mean he/she has one thing they base their paintings off of.
Pay particular attention to the paragraph that begins “Once the Author is removed…” This is the heart of Barthes’ essay. What is he saying here? What does it mean for the visual arts?- I think that he is saying their is an underlying message we have not reveled… if the author is removed, will their still be writing? This can relate to visual arts because if their is no artist, is their any art at all?
1 year ago
*Project 4*
1. Whip your hair back and forth.
2. Crawl up and down some stairs.
3. Play “Ring around the Rosie” in a public place.
4. Sit on a public bench with stuffed animals.
5. Trace your hand as many times around to make a complete circle.
6. Act out a scenario using Lego men.
7. Perform a puppet show using socks.
8. Wear two different shoes to class.
9. Scare someone and video tape it.
10. Create a dance using just your hands.
1 year ago
Art After Philosophy
Formalist art deals with the idea that a wrk’s artistic value is determined by it’s form and it’s purely visual aspects. It emphasizes color, line, shape, and texture.
After getting into this essay and reading about formal art, I think Kosuth’s main argument will have to deal with how there is a different way to view the two subjects: aesthetics and art. I think that he will also go into detail about the differences in the observations and also how they do or do not relate to philosophy. I also think he will state that art can be aesthetic, but aesthetics isn’t art.
Morphology of traditional art is the language of it. It has to deal with how it is perceived and what it is seen as. It relates to conceptual art because… the subject matter of conceptual investigations is the meaning of certain words and expressions- the two relate in a language sort of way.
Conceptul art is tautological because it has repetitions. It investigates the meaning.
I do not agree with him when he said being an artist now means to question the nature of art. He stated that if one is questioning the nature of a painting, one cannot be questioning the nature of art. I think you can question whatever form you’d like. Just because you chose to question the painting doesn’t mean anything.
He means that in the beginning, there were only a few ways to go about art. As time has passed, there are tons of new advancements and new ways to make art. The possibilities are endless now days.
Art is what you make it. Anything can be art. The value depends on the perceiver.
A work of art is a presentation of the artists intention, that is, he is saying that that particular work of rt is art.
A proposition is analytic when its validity depends solely on the definitions of the symbols it contains. Synthetic I when its validity is determined by the facts of experience. Picasso is an artist that would be considered analytical. Max Coyer would be an example of a synthetic artist.
It’s relevant to digital art because digital art uses a range of artistic works and practices via digital technology. The two are related because both can use aesthetics and morphology.
Art is art. It has no “one” definition. It is what you make and or perceive it as.
