Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Do not hesitate to go back on one of the past 40 posts and comment them; most of them are not necessarily linked with actuality.
Anyway here are some eggs as requested by the tradition:
Sarah Lucas - Autoportrait with eggs
See u soon!
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Defining whether a work of art is ‘original’ or not may depend on a stereotyped definition of originality for social coherence needs, and may thus according to Harrison and Wood “be unresponsive to the work of those who challenge the authority of that tradition and that stereotype”. Because we also hold stereotypes about our own culture... We may therefore imagine that there is a bias when exploring the question of our identity... Would you really think that you can be that subjective?
For example, Graciela Trajtenberg highlights in Modernism in Action: Comparing the relationship between the Visual Arts, Social class and Politics in Israeli Nation-building, that the attempt of artists affiliated with the organised labor movement, to promote an art deeply embedded in the local cultural conditions (“reflecting the political aims of the Israeli settler movement” and “with a flavour of Middle-East cultural heritage”) were countered by the contemporary art world hegemonic power.
Guy Ben-Ner -- From 'Self portrait as a family man'
Taking the problem on the reverse, studies also highlight the difficulties that an artist may encounter while trying to depict elements related to a ‘true national culture’.
By analysing the creation process of an artist who wishes to produce an artwork that might reflect his/her national culture, Fanon (1965) highlight that the exchange of influences between ‘dominant’ (here the US and European art world and its influence on the international art market) and the dominated cultures (second third and quarter world cultures that try to impose their own cultural views on the international art market) is too deep nowadays.
This artist would take the risk to come across the use of stereotypes within the depiction intention. In attempting to reach the basis of what might consist the ‘true’ national culture, artists deny the foreign culture and its influence, such as its contributions in terms of techniques and trends. Such work is therefore based on the assumption that constant recognisable patterns exists in what is considered as ‘true national art’. But Fanon, argues that “the forms of thought and what it feeds on, together with modern techniques of information, language and dress have dialectically reorganised the people’s intelligences".
In the artist attempt to depict what consists of the ‘true’ elements of a culture “turns paradoxically towards the past and away from actual events”. He/she, then illustrates the ‘cast-offs of thought’, a set of rules, norms and values that do not reflect the reality of the culture anymore.
Thursday, March 6, 2008
The Viewer's position: Is your artwork 'Offering' or 'Demanding'?
0 comments Posted by seiinod at 10:12 PMConsidering the artwork as a channel of communication, we can distinguish two different ways in which the viewer can be addressed. Represented elements can be ‘Offering’ to the viewer or being source of a ‘demand’.
The idea of interacting with the work of art is not new and has particularly be enhanced by Paul Klee in the 1920’s when using the concept of ‘space in between’ also called third space. Hannula in -Space: a merry-go-round of opportunity an article from Kiasma magazine, argues that the 3rd space is, "the space, situation and opportunity, which can open up between two persons, or, for instance, a viewer and an object. It is, most of all, a question of encounter, which possibly creates the third space. An event, which simultaneously belongs to both parties”.
Therefore the ‘encounter’ is viewed as a starting point for an act of mutual influence between the participants, an interaction that connects both parties (here the viewer and the artwork).
Hannula describes the creation of such encounter and the creation of the third space as a strictly empathic individual experience that has no rules except trying to be open to other views and to give opportunity for self-expression.
Hannula says here, that entering the third space leads to the creation of an area where “the content of concepts and statements is hotly debated. In the best case, it creates opportunities which promote something different, new and previously unidentified”.
Alternative ways of reflection on identity, position, environment and goals arise out of the collaboration of two parties with their own culture, language and personal history that can lead to the alteration of assumptions and prejudices and might animate to call the validity of stereotypes into question.
An example of the appearance of such ‘third space’ could be illustrated by a performance which consisted of measuring people at the entrance of the gallery, and giving them shoes with adapted heels that completed their height to exactly 200cm (If you find the name of the artist and the performance please do not hesitate to comment this post).
His idea was to let people enter in an almost empty gallery enabling them to look each other in the eyes at the same level. In this way he created a third space between the participants who themselves became a part of the artwork for a moment.
Paul Cezanne - Nature morte au crane
Sacks in 'Lecture on conversation', highlights that communicative power or ‘entitlement’ issues are resulting in the everyday use of communication due to viewer’s position: “Not everyone may address the viewer directly. Some may be looked at, other may themselves be the bearers of the look”. In other words, the issue of the viewer’s positionment recalls culturally embedded eye-contact, that will be the subject of a next post.
