RISD - Painting
http://www.risd.edu/graduate/painting/Default.aspx
SVA - Illustration as Visual Essay
http://www.schoolofvisualarts.edu/grad/index.jsp?sid0=2&sid1=32
Tyler School of Art, Temple University - Painting
http://www.temple.edu/tyler/painting/index.html
Pratt - Fine Arts
http://www.pratt.edu/academics/art_design/art_grad/fine_arts_grad/
MICA - Illustration
http://www.mica.edu/Programs_of_Study/MFA_Degree_Programs/Illustration_%28MFA_2011%29.html
_____
I am honestly not sure If I am going to attend graduate school, I most certainly have no plans to in the near future, accumulated too much debt with just undergrad. I found it frusterating how hard it was to come by illustration programs. If I were to go through the lengths of attending a graduate school, it damn well better be a school with the program of greatest interest to me, Illustration. Illustration is something I've always had my eye on, but have been unable to receive any formal education in the area because nowhere I've been has offered any such courses.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Video: "Untitled Fall '95" by Alex Bag - response
oh. my. god. I cannot stand the manner in which she talks..she sounds so air-headed and pretentious..typical 'teen angst' persona; like nails on chalkboard. I was a little lost with the second scene, where she repeats 'call me' over and over--it was kind of irritating, and none of her following performances seemed to get any better with the film, nor were they making any sense to me. Many of the clips are excessively repetitious. Her performances seemed to me more like the random ramblings of a bored child's imagination. The entirety of this film consists of bizarre performance clips framed by several clips of bag talking to the viewer of her experiences/feelings on being an art student at SVA.
I am not exactly clear on the purpose of this film; I think of it as a kind of critique on the typical 'art student'. At least I certainly hope that is the case and this girl is not taking herself seriously. I was kind of surprised, and perhaps a little upset, when seeing some of myself in the character she portrayed in her monologues to the audience as a student. Some of the things she rants about in regards to the school and her development as an artist are things I know I've thought about at some point in one sense or another. Hearing her complaints through this video provides a different kind of perspective, kind of a characture of what I myself probably am like in my moments of frustration. I don't like how it makes me a little stupid for thinking similarly, but at the same time I think these are concerns and feelings everyone encounters..the remarkably unremarkable journey a student goes through to become an artist.
I am not exactly clear on the purpose of this film; I think of it as a kind of critique on the typical 'art student'. At least I certainly hope that is the case and this girl is not taking herself seriously. I was kind of surprised, and perhaps a little upset, when seeing some of myself in the character she portrayed in her monologues to the audience as a student. Some of the things she rants about in regards to the school and her development as an artist are things I know I've thought about at some point in one sense or another. Hearing her complaints through this video provides a different kind of perspective, kind of a characture of what I myself probably am like in my moments of frustration. I don't like how it makes me a little stupid for thinking similarly, but at the same time I think these are concerns and feelings everyone encounters..the remarkably unremarkable journey a student goes through to become an artist.
Seven Days in the Art World - Ch6: The Studio Visit
•“It is frowned upon to touch the painting.”
•“Changing the context of an object is, in and of itself, art. It sounds like a put-down, but it’s not.”
•“What makes Takashi’s art great—and also potentially scary—is his honest and completely canny relationship to commercial culture
industries”
•"Everywhere I looked, there was Murakami, not only did we have two magnetic works in the 'Painting from Rauschenberg to Murakami'
exhibition at the Museo Correr, but you could see the Murakami handbags through the window of the Louis Vuitton store, and African
immigrants were selling copies on the street. Collectors were carrying real ones; tourists carried fake. Murakami had taken over."
•“Unlike Warhol’s other artistic heirs, who pull the popular into the realm of art, Murakami flips it and reenters popular culture”
•"To experience Takashi, you have to experience the commercial elements of his work."
•"I change my direction or continue in the same direction by seeing people's reaction. My concentration is how to survive long-term and
how to join with the contemporary feeling... I work by trial and error to be popular."
•"the most important thing for creative people is the sense that they are learning. It's like a video game. They have frustration with my
high expectations, so when they get 'yes' for their work, they feel like they've won a level."
•“A Studio is supposed to be a site of intense contemplation.”
•“A studio isn’t just a place where artists make art, but a platform for negotiation and a stage for performances.”
Seven Days in the Art World - Ch2: The Crit
•"MFA stands for yet another Mother-Fucking Artist" [I just had to use it, so rare this kind of phrase is found in my assigned readings for school haha]
•"It is no halfhearted thing. You are materializing- taking something from the inside and putting it out into the world so you can be relieved of it." [in reference to what an artist is]
•“art comes out of failure”
•"I don't care about the artists intentions. I care if the work looks like it might have some consequences."
•“Artists don’t fully understand what they’ve made, so other people’s readings can help them ‘see at the conscious level’ what they’ve done”..“it’s about being open to the possibility of what you could know”
•"Never go to the wall text. Never ask the artist. Learn to read the work."
•“Criticality is a strategy for the production of knowledge. Our view is that art should interrogate the social and cultural ideas of its time. Other places might want a work to produce pleasure or feelings.”
•“Even if crits are performances, the students seem not to be acting but searching for authentic self expression.”
•“Often the people who are making sense are the ones for whom it hasn’t started working yet.”
•"I believe in education for its own sake, because it is deeply humanizing. It is being a fulfilled human being"
•"It is no halfhearted thing. You are materializing- taking something from the inside and putting it out into the world so you can be relieved of it." [in reference to what an artist is]
•“art comes out of failure”
•"I don't care about the artists intentions. I care if the work looks like it might have some consequences."
•“Artists don’t fully understand what they’ve made, so other people’s readings can help them ‘see at the conscious level’ what they’ve done”..“it’s about being open to the possibility of what you could know”
•"Never go to the wall text. Never ask the artist. Learn to read the work."
•“Criticality is a strategy for the production of knowledge. Our view is that art should interrogate the social and cultural ideas of its time. Other places might want a work to produce pleasure or feelings.”
•“Even if crits are performances, the students seem not to be acting but searching for authentic self expression.”
•“Often the people who are making sense are the ones for whom it hasn’t started working yet.”
•"I believe in education for its own sake, because it is deeply humanizing. It is being a fulfilled human being"
Friday, November 13, 2009
MFA Show
I have to say, honestly there was not much that I saw in this show that really interested me. for one, I am getting tired of all the abstract art, and random installations that seem to me like someone took part of their messy room, put it in a gallery, and called it art. I didn't find many of the works aesthetically pleasing nor thought provoking. Though I'm not trying to be offensive, I don't mean to come off that way, I'm just being honest; it's just my opinion. Perhaps I am just missing something, am I not getting some deeper meaning? I don't know, things like that frustrate me. It was also kind of irritating that many of the works were not yet labeled..why open the gallery if it is not ready yet? I also have very little to say about the setup of the gallery. It means nothing to me, I cant see any functional relationship between the works displayed. But, I will stop my little rant there and now focus on the things that I did like.
I was mildly interested in Caetlynn Booth's paintings on the left wall of the main gallery, both were dark landscape paintings, each composition spanned two canvases to make one long horizontally rectangular scene. Personally, I love paintings that are more of an exaggerated rectangle, I don't know why. I can tell that the artist paid a great deal of attention to detail. Even though there is not very much variation in the values used in the paintings, and everything is very dark, you can still see every detail. Every line is still sharp, and every object recognizable.
In 'Night Park' I particularly liked the lamps and the small slivers of light they cast, peaking from behind the trees in the background. Although very small relative to the whole painting, I feel like the painting is a success largely due to the artists depiction of the light.
In the far back room [gallery f], farthest to the right from the main room, I encountered a couple paintings I really liked. The two extremely colorful paintings on the right wall of gallery f, unfortunately without labels, so I've no idea the title or artist of these paintings. These two paintings are abstract, but not entirely..more like they are distorted. There are many recognizable figures within the paintings, some seemingly human and others looked more like animals.
I am particularly interested in how the paint was laid, the brush strokes create fluid patterns of small, colorful, squiggly lines within the bark of the trees; These brush strokes almost remind me of Van Gogh's style. Yet in other areas like the leaves, the color is almost graphically laid out in flat areas
Yet another unlabeled artist in the first room to the right of the main gallery had a couple extreemly wide, short paintings, like an exaggerated rectangle. My favorite is the predominantly black painting with a spacey looking landscape featuring a setting sun in a receded background, illustrated with neatly painted white and neon outlines.
A few human figures are painted in outlines along with a couple other solid figures all of which are all placed pretty much on the same plane and floating about the canvas as if they were not bound to the landscape, but floating in space. It almost seems like they were just placed on the surface of the painting, nothing really recedes into the background aside from a few diagonal lines depicting the ground and walls. This was probably one of the more unique paintings, its size shape, content, and style were distinctly different from anyone else's.
Now the best for last. My absolute favorite artist in the show was also not labeled, however through a little investigation I discovered her name is Betsy Vanlangden. Hers were the photos directly to the right of the main entrance. I was surprised I did not notice them until I was about to leave the gallery, I feel these photos deserved a more noticeable location. I found nearly all her photographs to be very captivating and beautiful. They are all fairly large, I don't know exactly what their dimensions are, but something like 3x3 feet..just a shot in the dark. In each of these photographs the subject is the same woman, possibly the artist herself, but I do not know. Most of the photos are portraits, and only one is a body shot, interestingly with her head cropped off, almost the antithesis of a portrait..potentially this could be a different subject, I cannot be sure.
In none of these photos is the subject in normal clothing, infact she is practically nude, her body is covered either in paint, or with the use of some kind of non-clothing material to make clothing or accessories [ie a cigarette-butt necklace, or a dress made of audiotape]
This is one of the three photographs with her wearing this cigarette necklace..it almost looks like it could be a Truth/anti-smoking advertisement, but even though the subject looks unhappy/sickly and dirty, it is still very beautiful.
Betsy Vanlangen is kind of more than just a photographer, she is using the human body as a canvas, not really like fashion, nor exactly like a painting either. After preparing the body, it is then immortalized in a photo, which is the final work of art. So there is more effort and skill required for these images than just finding a nice scenery and a good composition for a photograph, there is craft involved, work of the hands and imagination are evident and necessary.
As a random side note, when I looked at these photographs, I was immediately reminded of the singer Lady Gaga. Partly I think due to the slight resemblance in the face, and partly because the way her body is covered, the 'clothing' if you would call it, reminded me of Lady Gaga's insanely outlandish fashion sense.
I was mildly interested in Caetlynn Booth's paintings on the left wall of the main gallery, both were dark landscape paintings, each composition spanned two canvases to make one long horizontally rectangular scene. Personally, I love paintings that are more of an exaggerated rectangle, I don't know why. I can tell that the artist paid a great deal of attention to detail. Even though there is not very much variation in the values used in the paintings, and everything is very dark, you can still see every detail. Every line is still sharp, and every object recognizable.
In 'Night Park' I particularly liked the lamps and the small slivers of light they cast, peaking from behind the trees in the background. Although very small relative to the whole painting, I feel like the painting is a success largely due to the artists depiction of the light.
In the far back room [gallery f], farthest to the right from the main room, I encountered a couple paintings I really liked. The two extremely colorful paintings on the right wall of gallery f, unfortunately without labels, so I've no idea the title or artist of these paintings. These two paintings are abstract, but not entirely..more like they are distorted. There are many recognizable figures within the paintings, some seemingly human and others looked more like animals.
I am particularly interested in how the paint was laid, the brush strokes create fluid patterns of small, colorful, squiggly lines within the bark of the trees; These brush strokes almost remind me of Van Gogh's style. Yet in other areas like the leaves, the color is almost graphically laid out in flat areas
Yet another unlabeled artist in the first room to the right of the main gallery had a couple extreemly wide, short paintings, like an exaggerated rectangle. My favorite is the predominantly black painting with a spacey looking landscape featuring a setting sun in a receded background, illustrated with neatly painted white and neon outlines.
A few human figures are painted in outlines along with a couple other solid figures all of which are all placed pretty much on the same plane and floating about the canvas as if they were not bound to the landscape, but floating in space. It almost seems like they were just placed on the surface of the painting, nothing really recedes into the background aside from a few diagonal lines depicting the ground and walls. This was probably one of the more unique paintings, its size shape, content, and style were distinctly different from anyone else's.
Now the best for last. My absolute favorite artist in the show was also not labeled, however through a little investigation I discovered her name is Betsy Vanlangden. Hers were the photos directly to the right of the main entrance. I was surprised I did not notice them until I was about to leave the gallery, I feel these photos deserved a more noticeable location. I found nearly all her photographs to be very captivating and beautiful. They are all fairly large, I don't know exactly what their dimensions are, but something like 3x3 feet..just a shot in the dark. In each of these photographs the subject is the same woman, possibly the artist herself, but I do not know. Most of the photos are portraits, and only one is a body shot, interestingly with her head cropped off, almost the antithesis of a portrait..potentially this could be a different subject, I cannot be sure.
In none of these photos is the subject in normal clothing, infact she is practically nude, her body is covered either in paint, or with the use of some kind of non-clothing material to make clothing or accessories [ie a cigarette-butt necklace, or a dress made of audiotape]
This is one of the three photographs with her wearing this cigarette necklace..it almost looks like it could be a Truth/anti-smoking advertisement, but even though the subject looks unhappy/sickly and dirty, it is still very beautiful.
Betsy Vanlangen is kind of more than just a photographer, she is using the human body as a canvas, not really like fashion, nor exactly like a painting either. After preparing the body, it is then immortalized in a photo, which is the final work of art. So there is more effort and skill required for these images than just finding a nice scenery and a good composition for a photograph, there is craft involved, work of the hands and imagination are evident and necessary.
As a random side note, when I looked at these photographs, I was immediately reminded of the singer Lady Gaga. Partly I think due to the slight resemblance in the face, and partly because the way her body is covered, the 'clothing' if you would call it, reminded me of Lady Gaga's insanely outlandish fashion sense.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Exhibit: Alpha Art
Unfortunately, I am too poor to make my way into new york to take advantage of its seemingly endless expanse of galleries. Which is why I made my way to the Zimmerli, and this small art gallery called Alpha Art in downtown New Brunswick. I had no idea it existed until a friend told me about it, but I am glad I checked it out. The art featured in this gallery in some sense kind of relates to the Blocks of Color exhibit I saw in the Zimmerli, only in the sense that these also seemed a lot like watercolor paintings.
[Neptune's Revenge, 24 x 48" diptych, lacquer on panel, by John Hawaka]
Many of them are totally abstract paintings, with no real discernible pictoral representation of anything. However I really enjoyed the splash of colors across the paintings, some more than others, although I cannot really say exactly why I preferred some over others.
[Smokey Glen, 24 x 32", lacquer on pane, by John Hawaka]
Some of these paintings however did resemble familiar objects such as people or flowers, some more so than others.
[Blue Dahlia, 32 x 48", lacquer on panel, by John Hawaka]
[Neptune's Revenge, 24 x 48" diptych, lacquer on panel, by John Hawaka]Many of them are totally abstract paintings, with no real discernible pictoral representation of anything. However I really enjoyed the splash of colors across the paintings, some more than others, although I cannot really say exactly why I preferred some over others.
[Smokey Glen, 24 x 32", lacquer on pane, by John Hawaka]Some of these paintings however did resemble familiar objects such as people or flowers, some more so than others.
[Blue Dahlia, 32 x 48", lacquer on panel, by John Hawaka]Among all of these paintings were a few which featured a style drastically different from the rest, these in particular caught my eye as I walked around the gallery. They were like colored line drawings on a solid black background, and they almost seemed like neon lights glowing at night. The farther I stood from the painting, the more recognizable the paintings became.
[Girl with Cat, 36 x 48", acrylic, by John Hawaka]
[Girl with Cat, 36 x 48", acrylic, by John Hawaka]Seven Days in the Artworld: Chapter 3: The Fair
[78] -- "Only a century ago, no one had a car. Now people have two or three. That's the way its going with art."
[79] -- "The fair is significant from a prestige point of view. If a gallery is not admitted, people might think that it is not as important as another gallery that is. If a gallery is refused next year, it could destroy their business."
(comment by a member of the admission committee)
[81] -- In the art world, gossip is never idle. It is a vital Form of Market intelligence.
[82] -- The art is so demanding that the architecture needs to be nearly invisible. The ceilings are high enough to go unnoticed, and dealers praise the quality of the walls, which support even the heaviest works. most importantly, the expensive, artificial lighting is clean and white.
[82] -- "If you go after art and quality, the money will come later...We have to make the same decisions as the artists. Do they create great art or art that sells well? With the galleries it's the same. Are they commercial or do they believe in something?"
(comment by Samuel Keller - The Director of Art Basel since 2002)
[82/3] -- When you first start collecting, you're intensely competitive, but eventually you learn two things. First, if an artist is only going to make one good work, then there is no sense in fighting over it. Second, a collection is a personal vision. No one can steal your vision."
(comment by Don Rubell)
[83] -- "there is an implied incompetence. Out of everyone in the art world, colelctors are the least professional. All they have to do is write a check."
(comment by Don Rubell)
[83] -- "Collector should be an earned category. An artist doesn't become an artist in a day, so a collector shouldn't become a collector in a day. It's a lifetime process."
(comment by Mera Rubell)
[84] -- "When you buy from the first or second show, you're inside the confidence-building, the identity-building of an artist. It's not just about buying a piece. It's about buying into someone's life and where they are going with it. It's a mutual commitment, which is pretty intense."
(comment by Mera Rubell)
[88] -- Unlike other industries, where buyers are anonymous and interchangeable, here artists' reputations are enhanced or contaminated by the people who own their work.
[88] -- "Occasionally meeting an artist destroys the art. You almost don't trust it. you think what you're seeing in the work is an accident."
(comment by Mera Rubell)
[91] -- Logsdail distinguishes between galleries and what he disparages as 'dealerships'. the former discover and develop artists; the latter trade in art objects.
[91] -- " 'Buying in depth', or the practice of acquiring many works by the same artist, is often cited as a very respectable way to collect."
(as opposed to 'fishing with a giant net', where some collectors seek to purchase many various works from various artists so they can claim that 'I have one of those', or 'I was there')
[95] -- When it comes to the relationship of artistic and monetary value, "you can't use money as an index of quality. that is a fallacy. That will drive you crazy!"
(comment by John Baldessari)
[79] -- "The fair is significant from a prestige point of view. If a gallery is not admitted, people might think that it is not as important as another gallery that is. If a gallery is refused next year, it could destroy their business."
(comment by a member of the admission committee)
[81] -- In the art world, gossip is never idle. It is a vital Form of Market intelligence.
[82] -- The art is so demanding that the architecture needs to be nearly invisible. The ceilings are high enough to go unnoticed, and dealers praise the quality of the walls, which support even the heaviest works. most importantly, the expensive, artificial lighting is clean and white.
[82] -- "If you go after art and quality, the money will come later...We have to make the same decisions as the artists. Do they create great art or art that sells well? With the galleries it's the same. Are they commercial or do they believe in something?"
(comment by Samuel Keller - The Director of Art Basel since 2002)
[82/3] -- When you first start collecting, you're intensely competitive, but eventually you learn two things. First, if an artist is only going to make one good work, then there is no sense in fighting over it. Second, a collection is a personal vision. No one can steal your vision."
(comment by Don Rubell)
[83] -- "there is an implied incompetence. Out of everyone in the art world, colelctors are the least professional. All they have to do is write a check."
(comment by Don Rubell)
[83] -- "Collector should be an earned category. An artist doesn't become an artist in a day, so a collector shouldn't become a collector in a day. It's a lifetime process."
(comment by Mera Rubell)
[84] -- "When you buy from the first or second show, you're inside the confidence-building, the identity-building of an artist. It's not just about buying a piece. It's about buying into someone's life and where they are going with it. It's a mutual commitment, which is pretty intense."
(comment by Mera Rubell)
[88] -- Unlike other industries, where buyers are anonymous and interchangeable, here artists' reputations are enhanced or contaminated by the people who own their work.
[88] -- "Occasionally meeting an artist destroys the art. You almost don't trust it. you think what you're seeing in the work is an accident."
(comment by Mera Rubell)
[91] -- Logsdail distinguishes between galleries and what he disparages as 'dealerships'. the former discover and develop artists; the latter trade in art objects.
[91] -- " 'Buying in depth', or the practice of acquiring many works by the same artist, is often cited as a very respectable way to collect."
(as opposed to 'fishing with a giant net', where some collectors seek to purchase many various works from various artists so they can claim that 'I have one of those', or 'I was there')
[95] -- When it comes to the relationship of artistic and monetary value, "you can't use money as an index of quality. that is a fallacy. That will drive you crazy!"
(comment by John Baldessari)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)