electronic music

Since I was in eighth grade i've been in and out of bands. Nothing can fill the void that singing and making music does for me. I've never been a fan of purely electronic music, where everything is made by digital means. I always thought it lacked emotion or authenticity. On the other hand I do enjoy when the electronic is mixed with the acoustic or analog instruments. This combination creates a a new depth that neither acoustic or electronic can accomplish on their own. -I guess this is just personal taste, or maybe just what i'm into at this moment. I guess i'm trying to say that a dude making music on his laptop won't quite satisfy everything i desire out of music. Although it makes it a heck of a lot easier to write music when you don't have to worry about band members with commitment issues.

surveillance

I don't really mind being watched out in public places, like in stores and outside in sketching places. i know that for the most part cameras are used to keep places safe or to help catch criminals. I think it is getting a little scary when companies use video to figure out people shopping habits... but i guess thats just smart business. The one thing that scared me and i did not know was that there are companies that are keeping track of what i look at online, all my personal information including SS#, credit card #'s, banking info...etc. You would think that passwords keep things private... i guess not. Its hard to think that a company I didn't authorize has any right to know my personal information. I see no reason that companies should be allowed to know this information, all it leads to is misuse and neglect, which ultimately leads to theft. It kinda makes me paranoid- like someone is watching me type right now... not cool.

survival research labs

survival research labs is a tricky thing to place. If we are considering this art I don't know how to justify getting an art degree. I mean don't get me wrong, i would probably enjoy going to see a bunch of huge robots destroying each other, but i can't see it being anything other than a large scale version of that battle bots show that used to be on TV. i know its supposed to be different then just smart people playing with really big toys, but what else can you really say about this. well, i mean i'm sure that we can read into what they are doing a pull out meaning, cultural significance, and the good old question "what is ART?....really?". But we can do this to anything, i'm sure i could bring in anything and someone would be able to make something up about it and could defend that its art. I've seen it happen it many critiques. Why can't we move past this? why all of the sudden are we praising things for not looking like art? the more abstract the better, the more out there and ethereal it is the better, the more someone does not notice it the better.... anyway, i'm getting off topic..... Can't we just let survival research labs be fun without tainting it by putting it through a critique? Its just really awesome robots doing really awesome destructive things. Couldn't we ask the same questions about monster trucks and demolition derbies, or shooting pellet guns at aerosol cans in the camp fire? -I'm sure it will come up in one of my classes at some point. Just because an audience might feel threatened by these robots doesn't mean that it is all of the sudden a new art form. Maybe they need to feel threatened because they are watching huge robots destroy each other, while on fire....and they should be. why do we want everything to be art? is it just an easier way to justify making it? if we call it art does that make it more important? i wish someone would just tell me- is everything art, or is it just what we as artist deem important enough to be art? I know I could justify reasons for why this is art (just like i was trained to do)... but it all comes down to a gut response that i can't ignore, i just don't think its art. maybe none of us make art anymore- maybe we should call it something else.

Fluxus and the new John Cage performance

I know I said i didn't care too much for Cage in my last blog but after watching the actual performance i think I've started to warm up to him.  It was cool to see something other than 4'33".  I understand 4'33" a little better now- but I'm still more interested in his other experimentation.  so anyway thanks for finding that video and posting it, it really helped change my opinion.  

Fluxus-

The Fluxus movement is very hit or miss with me.  There is a lot of art i find interesting that came out of this period - and a lot I don't really care for.  I think I connected with Nam June Paik the most because he still was concerned about how things looked visually.  Even though he was working in different media for his time, his work still felt cared for- like he wasn't just joking around all the time.  There was still some seriousness to his work, and because it wasn't so ethereal and intangible (like a lot of the other work) I felt like I could connect with him better.  I think across the board for this movement I connected with the work that was still concerned with how it was interpreted visually.  For the sound pieces and performances I think i was still interested in the ones that were maintaining a visual aesthetic, but it was more hit or miss depending on what i personally thought was interesting to listen to- or in some cases not listen to.  I forget the artist and the name of the performance but the performance that sticks out the most is the one with the tuba or french horn player that was on stage standing for a minute or so- then takes a bow and white confetti spills out of the horn on to the floor.  I really enjoyed this piece which I thought was beautifully conceptualized and executed.  Although it seemed very short for a performance, I can't see it needing to be any longer- in fact If it was longer it might have lost its appeal.  I definitely think that the fluxus movement was a healthy response to the stuffy side of the art world, but in no means do i think that it should replace it. I am glad to see that we have begun to mesh the fluxus ideas into the other movements in art history so that artists can be free to explore more ideas in their art making. 

john cage

i'm not sure how to take john cage's performances.  it's not that i don't understand them because i do understand for the most part the ideas he is trying to convey.  i really don't feel like it challenges my notion of what art can be either.  maybe i'm just not all that interested or feel like i've seen it before.  i understand the reason why i accept this type of art is because people like him have done it in the past, its just hard to have a genuine reaction.  i see the importance of how art like this has helped shape what can be done now,  but it just didn't interest me.  maybe my reaction would have been different if i didn't know what was going to happen, or if i was able to actually experience it.  sorry so glum. 

Matthew Barney

I have seen Matthew Barney's 'The Order' before and i had a similar negative reaction -like we discussed in class.  The first time i saw it i I felt like i was supposed to understand something and i was just too stupid to get it.  Or maybe i just wasn't cool enough!  It's not like i didn't like the video the first time - its just that i felt it was out of reach, and that honestly made me feel jealous!  I enjoyed the imagery and the costumes, and the fact that he incorporated his sculpture in to his work.  For some reason that video has stuck with me and has recently become of interest to my own work.  i think the more i see it the more i understand the idea behind the work.....(not well enough to explain yet, but I find myself accepting his language more.)  I watched it one time when there was narration along with it, and i thought that was helpful.   But even with the narration it was confusing.  i've come to accept that i don't really need to understand all of his meanings to appreciate the work.  Visually there are many things to keep my interest.  And even though he is not specific in what he is trying to say, i believe you can understand the the tone of his work.  I was excited that I was able to see it again in class.   

response to Man Ray documentary

I really enjoyed watching the documentary about Man Ray.  I've taken a lot of art history courses throughout the years and the only thing I can remember seeing of his was his iron with tacks glued on.  I feel like he was always looked past so we could spend more time on Duchamp.  It was interesting to see all that he contributed to art history.  Although his first love was painting i was not that interested in his painting prior to his photography work.  His paintings just made me think of what everyone else was doing at the time.  What i thought was interesting was how he introduced art to the fashion industry.  It was impressive that he was not only able to use photography to make a living, but that he transferred his creative energy from painting into changing the way we view fashion.  His portraiture seemed authentic and raw. The subjects, who were friends and visitors in his studio, were portrayed how they came. Real human beings without touch ups or fake poses.  He was able to capture their awkwardness in front of the camera.  

The documentary showed his dedication to his art making.  Even when times were tough and people hated him he kept his spirits high.  If things weren't going well in one place he would move some where else.  My favorite part of the documentary was his personality.  He just seemed like such a cool guy.  Every time he said something it would make me smile.  It definitely made me appreciate his contribution to the arts.