Part 2: meaning
Have you ever been asked about an artwork, or overheard in a gallery the question: ‘...but what is it about?’ In this part, you will examine meaning in terms of the relationship between:
• Artwork and audience
• Artist and audience
• Artist and artwork
What are some of the issues that the artist grapples with in the creation of an artwork and as they invite others to respond to it?
How does the audience go about receiving this communication from the artist through the artwork and what happens in this three-way conversation? How do you talk about things that might not exist in language?
• Artwork and audience
• Artist and audience
• Artist and artwork
What are some of the issues that the artist grapples with in the creation of an artwork and as they invite others to respond to it?
How does the audience go about receiving this communication from the artist through the artwork and what happens in this three-way conversation? How do you talk about things that might not exist in language?
topic 1: artwork and meaning
reading point 1: form and content
Sontag, S. (1994) ‘Against Interpretation’ In: Sontag, S. Against Interpretation. London: Vintage. pp. 3-14 [online] At:
http://www.stccenglish.com/stccenglish/Year_11_files/Sontag-Against%20Interpretation.pdf (Accessed on 21.06.18)
From the guide:
In her 1964 essay Against Interpretation, Sontag makes a plea for a return to what she imagines the early appreciation of art would have been like. Sontag traces the current Western analysis of art back to Greek mimetic theories introduced by Plato and revisited by Aristotle. Representational art was believed to be a copy of a copy and therefore it must be defended in comparison to the original. Through this necessity to defend comes the separation of ‘form, and ‘content’. ‘Form’ is what we see and ‘content’ is what is believed to be ‘represented’ by it. The ideas or concepts behind the work must be explained or interpreted. Much like biblical text was interpreted for the layperson, in modern times the critic must explain and ‘excavate’ the meaning behind works of ‘high’ culture.
Notes from the article
Reflection
I agree with this idea that society has at times become so overly concerned with interpreting art that they have forgotten to simply enjoy it. Though you could also argue that allowing your self to 'experience' art through your senses is still a type of interpretation as it allows you to prescribe an emotion of feeling to the piece. However, being emotional beings, there is a great value in setting aside logic and the search for truth and simply taking in the moment created by a piece of art. Though I value the arguments made about the importance of form, I think that form and content cannot be mutually exclusive. Even if I create a piece with no clear content involved, a viewer will find some, as it is their means of reconciling what they see and placing it within a realm of their understanding. I could also create something that was purely meant to experiment with content by using every allegorical cliche in the book, but a viewer misses all of them and is simply moved by a colour or expressive gesture.
http://www.stccenglish.com/stccenglish/Year_11_files/Sontag-Against%20Interpretation.pdf (Accessed on 21.06.18)
From the guide:
In her 1964 essay Against Interpretation, Sontag makes a plea for a return to what she imagines the early appreciation of art would have been like. Sontag traces the current Western analysis of art back to Greek mimetic theories introduced by Plato and revisited by Aristotle. Representational art was believed to be a copy of a copy and therefore it must be defended in comparison to the original. Through this necessity to defend comes the separation of ‘form, and ‘content’. ‘Form’ is what we see and ‘content’ is what is believed to be ‘represented’ by it. The ideas or concepts behind the work must be explained or interpreted. Much like biblical text was interpreted for the layperson, in modern times the critic must explain and ‘excavate’ the meaning behind works of ‘high’ culture.
Notes from the article
- Mimesis is a Greek word used in aesthetic or artistic theory which refers to the attempt at reproducing or imitating reality.
- Plato does not see the value of art at is is merely a copy of a copy which cannot serve a practical purpose.
- Aristotle believes art has therapeutic value as it can draw on emotion
- In order to defend the value of art we need to distinguish between form and content
- Content is about what the art is saying and comes first according to the author
- Where there is content, there needs to be interpretation
- Interpretation is affected by historical and cultural context
- Interpretation makes art manageable and comfortable
- The artist my not have intended for the art to have a meaning or to need an interpretation
- A great deal of modern art ties to steer clear of interpretation
- The author suggests that content takes mos of the attention when interpreting art and that we need to allow for more opportunity where form take president.
- Interpretation has robbed us of the sensory perception of art
- The function of criticism should be to show how it is what it is, even that it is what it is, rather than to show what it means.
Reflection
I agree with this idea that society has at times become so overly concerned with interpreting art that they have forgotten to simply enjoy it. Though you could also argue that allowing your self to 'experience' art through your senses is still a type of interpretation as it allows you to prescribe an emotion of feeling to the piece. However, being emotional beings, there is a great value in setting aside logic and the search for truth and simply taking in the moment created by a piece of art. Though I value the arguments made about the importance of form, I think that form and content cannot be mutually exclusive. Even if I create a piece with no clear content involved, a viewer will find some, as it is their means of reconciling what they see and placing it within a realm of their understanding. I could also create something that was purely meant to experiment with content by using every allegorical cliche in the book, but a viewer misses all of them and is simply moved by a colour or expressive gesture.
exercise 2.1: Form and content
Choose two from the six artworks above. In your sketchbook make a table for each artwork with two columns: Form | Content. Try to separate out which parts of the work you think constitute form and which parts you would describe as content. Write a short paragraph of about 150 words describing your decision-making process. Are there aspects of the work that cannot be separated out in this way? Note them down alongside.
Many Mansions (1994)
I am not familiar with this artwork and have not conducted any research on the piece yet. Looking at the composition I would say that it already clear the artist has an agenda and/ message. Every form in this composition would have been chosen with a particular content in mind. To start with, I will not separate the parts of the painting in to form or content, but instead break down every form (I see) and connect it to possible content (meaning).
Many Mansions (1994)
I am not familiar with this artwork and have not conducted any research on the piece yet. Looking at the composition I would say that it already clear the artist has an agenda and/ message. Every form in this composition would have been chosen with a particular content in mind. To start with, I will not separate the parts of the painting in to form or content, but instead break down every form (I see) and connect it to possible content (meaning).
Form (What do I see?)
A park/ garden with trees and flowers.The trees have been trimmed into shapes and the flowers are arranged in letters. 3 dark men in neat attire tending to the garden A sign reading 'Welcome to ... estate' Numbers and letters that look like a license plate Gift baskets that look like they are meant for children Blue birds carrying ribbons What looks like a wall in the background |
Content (What does it mean?)
The following interpretation of content is based on my own personal and cultural context. A park/ garden with trees and flowers.The trees have been trimmed into shapes and the flowers are arranged in letters. The garden has been well kept making connections to something of a higher status or area that is sought after. The letters SG are created by the flowers, which are likely linked to the name of the estate. 3 dark men in neat attire tending to the garden The attire of the men give the impression of something corporate. The men are faceless which add to that idea. Alternatively it may be that the colour of the 3 men are more significant in understanding the setting. A sign reading 'Welcome to ... estate' Much of the sign is covered by flowers. There is a sense that beautiful gardens are covering up something potentially sinister. Numbers and letters that look like a license plate IL to me, would mean Illinois, which is in America. The artist is clearly identifying a place here for the viewer. Gift baskets that look like they are meant for children Once you notice the gift baskets you start considering whether or not the 3 men are actually gardening or burying something, alluding to something potentially even more dark and sinister. Blue birds carrying ribbons These remind me of the blue birds you find in Disney Movies, perpetuating ideas of happiness and cheer. What looks like a wall in the background Most estates have large wall, practically the serve the purpose of preserving the tranquility created inside, here they may also serve the purpose of keeping secrets inside. |
Now I will conduct some research to find out the intentions of the artist and compare this to my own interpretations.
In the 1990s there was a rise in public housing projects. the names often included the word Garden in them, which for the artist represented a great contradiction of what these low-income houses were actually like. He uses ironic juxtapositions to challenge the stereotypes of these projects. So let's compare the real meaning: |
A park/ garden with trees and flowers.The trees have been trimmed into shapes and the flowers are arranged in letters.
The trees and flowers represent spring and thus hope. Even though the artist has issues with estates, he still want to celebrate the spirit of the people who live in them. The SG stands for Stateway Gardens. (The Art Institute of Chicago, 2019)
3 dark men in neat attire tending to the garden
The emphasis was meant to be on the colour of the skin. Marshall especially wanted to develop the use of the black figure, " when I started to develop that figure was the way in which the folk and folklore of blackness always seemed to carry a derogatory connotation ...my thinking ... was to reclaim the images of blackness as an emblem of power, instead of an image of derision" (Marshall cited on Art 21, 2011). The figures appear large to make them heroic.
A sign reading 'Welcome to ... estate'
A direct referral to the many 'Garden' estates that were being built.
Numbers and letters that look like a license plate
This refers directly to the name of the housing project. It is a commentary of it's true nature. This type of name show that it is just another number and that there is a lack personal investment from those in power.
Gift baskets that look like they are meant for children
They represent fun and celebration, again a juxtaposition of how these communities are usually viewed. This implies that there is generosity and innocence in these communities too.
Blue birds carrying ribbons
Again, symbols of joy and happiness, potentially an honest depiction, or potentially irony. This is not clear.
What looks like a wall in the background
It turns out this represent other estates to make a commentary on the amount that has been built.
Reflection on Form and Content
My first instinct about the painting having a clear message of agenda was correct. The placement and choice of objects made it clear that the artist was trying to say something. Though many of my interpretations were not exactly spot on, I got the just of it containing irony or 'all not being as it seems'. The additional research in fact confirmed that every object in this piece as a significance. The artist is also known for creating large narrative pieces. Considering this, I would say that all parts of the painting fall under content. However, this content can not be perceived if the choice of form is not clear, so it is ultimately quite difficult to separate these two.
The trees and flowers represent spring and thus hope. Even though the artist has issues with estates, he still want to celebrate the spirit of the people who live in them. The SG stands for Stateway Gardens. (The Art Institute of Chicago, 2019)
3 dark men in neat attire tending to the garden
The emphasis was meant to be on the colour of the skin. Marshall especially wanted to develop the use of the black figure, " when I started to develop that figure was the way in which the folk and folklore of blackness always seemed to carry a derogatory connotation ...my thinking ... was to reclaim the images of blackness as an emblem of power, instead of an image of derision" (Marshall cited on Art 21, 2011). The figures appear large to make them heroic.
A sign reading 'Welcome to ... estate'
A direct referral to the many 'Garden' estates that were being built.
Numbers and letters that look like a license plate
This refers directly to the name of the housing project. It is a commentary of it's true nature. This type of name show that it is just another number and that there is a lack personal investment from those in power.
Gift baskets that look like they are meant for children
They represent fun and celebration, again a juxtaposition of how these communities are usually viewed. This implies that there is generosity and innocence in these communities too.
Blue birds carrying ribbons
Again, symbols of joy and happiness, potentially an honest depiction, or potentially irony. This is not clear.
What looks like a wall in the background
It turns out this represent other estates to make a commentary on the amount that has been built.
Reflection on Form and Content
My first instinct about the painting having a clear message of agenda was correct. The placement and choice of objects made it clear that the artist was trying to say something. Though many of my interpretations were not exactly spot on, I got the just of it containing irony or 'all not being as it seems'. The additional research in fact confirmed that every object in this piece as a significance. The artist is also known for creating large narrative pieces. Considering this, I would say that all parts of the painting fall under content. However, this content can not be perceived if the choice of form is not clear, so it is ultimately quite difficult to separate these two.
Works cited
Marshall, K.J. (2011) Many Mansions. [online] At: https://art21.org/read/kerry-james-marshall-many-mansions/ (Accessed on 10 December 2019)
The Arts Institute of Chicago (2019) Many Mansions. [online] At: https://archive.artic.edu/africanamerican/many-mansions/ (Accessed on 10 December 2019)
Marshall, K.J. (2011) Many Mansions. [online] At: https://art21.org/read/kerry-james-marshall-many-mansions/ (Accessed on 10 December 2019)
The Arts Institute of Chicago (2019) Many Mansions. [online] At: https://archive.artic.edu/africanamerican/many-mansions/ (Accessed on 10 December 2019)
Sawdust and Threads (2015)
Looking at the work my first impression is that it is an observational piece. This means that I see the form and accept the form. If you look at the piece longer and contemplate meaning, you may able to consider that the unraveling string has symbolism and therefore becomes a part of content.
Reflection
The perception of what constitutes form and what constitutes content would be subjective. The artist may have there own purpose or reason for creating a piece. A viewer in turn will perceive these according to their own understanding. As this piece was also part of a larger exhibition, it is also worth considering it as a part of a whole. It was part of the Sawdust and Threads Exhibition, which features items that were formerly displayed in museums, but were now being disposed of. When the objects are disposed of, they are broken down to their essential parts, which brings forth a theme of deconstruction. The exhibition was also meant to raise awareness of museum displays and what happens to objects when they are no longer being displayed (Wright, 2019). Knowing this information, I would still consider this piece to represent form, as it serves the purpose of being observation. The artist wants you to specifically see each part, there is not hidden meaning. If you were to view the collection as whole, you would uncover a narrative which would collectively add all pieces to content and form.
Looking at the work my first impression is that it is an observational piece. This means that I see the form and accept the form. If you look at the piece longer and contemplate meaning, you may able to consider that the unraveling string has symbolism and therefore becomes a part of content.
Reflection
The perception of what constitutes form and what constitutes content would be subjective. The artist may have there own purpose or reason for creating a piece. A viewer in turn will perceive these according to their own understanding. As this piece was also part of a larger exhibition, it is also worth considering it as a part of a whole. It was part of the Sawdust and Threads Exhibition, which features items that were formerly displayed in museums, but were now being disposed of. When the objects are disposed of, they are broken down to their essential parts, which brings forth a theme of deconstruction. The exhibition was also meant to raise awareness of museum displays and what happens to objects when they are no longer being displayed (Wright, 2019). Knowing this information, I would still consider this piece to represent form, as it serves the purpose of being observation. The artist wants you to specifically see each part, there is not hidden meaning. If you were to view the collection as whole, you would uncover a narrative which would collectively add all pieces to content and form.
Final Thoughts
There are times when an artist is creating solely for the purpose of observation and celebrating specific forms, possible because they find them interesting or aesthetically significant. In these cases you are more likely to view the objects in the work to be representative of form. On the other hand, there are times when artists choose a specific objects, place or colour because of the specific meaning they bring to the work, in this case they become a part of content. It is clear that the distinction between form and content can very much depend on the artists' intention when creating it. It is also clear that this perception of form and content also has the potential to be different when discussed from the perceptive of the viewer. I still ultimately take the position that one cannot exist without the other and that they inherently connected. |
Works Cited
Wright, C. (2019) Sawdust and Threads. [online] At: http://www.carolinewright.com/portfolio/sawdust-and-threads/ (Accessed on 11 December 2019)
Wright, C. (2019) Sawdust and Threads. [online] At: http://www.carolinewright.com/portfolio/sawdust-and-threads/ (Accessed on 11 December 2019)
research point 1
Art Now: Live work Sue Tomkins’ In: Tate.org.uk 09.12.06 [online] At:
http://www.tate.org.uk/context-comment/video/art-now-live-work-sue-tomkins (Accessed on 19.06.18)
How do ‘form’ and ‘content’ in Tompkin’s work affect each other? For example, if the way the artist uses nervous energy, rhythm, repetition and movement to deliver her words were changed, would it have the same meaning? Do you think the attempt to separate the two is helpful in understanding work? How much of the form in the work constitutes the content? Could they be the same thing?
Summarize your arguments in your learning log.
Sontag’s essay Against Interpretation (Reading Point 1) has to be viewed within the cultural context of the time. Conceptual artists in the 1960’s such as Terry Atkinson and Michael Baldwin (founder members of the group Art & Language), John Baldessari, Yoko Ono and Mary Kelly, amongst others, privileged the concept or idea behind the work above other considerations. The separation of form and content is traced back to the Greeks and Christianity, however, Sontag is writing in a time when Conceptual art takes this to its extreme. In contrast to this, during this period American Minimalist artists were making work that they claimed was devoid of content altogether. Despite how art and theory have changed since Sontag wrote this essay, the idea that form and content are distinct still has an enduring influence.
http://www.tate.org.uk/context-comment/video/art-now-live-work-sue-tomkins (Accessed on 19.06.18)
How do ‘form’ and ‘content’ in Tompkin’s work affect each other? For example, if the way the artist uses nervous energy, rhythm, repetition and movement to deliver her words were changed, would it have the same meaning? Do you think the attempt to separate the two is helpful in understanding work? How much of the form in the work constitutes the content? Could they be the same thing?
Summarize your arguments in your learning log.
Sontag’s essay Against Interpretation (Reading Point 1) has to be viewed within the cultural context of the time. Conceptual artists in the 1960’s such as Terry Atkinson and Michael Baldwin (founder members of the group Art & Language), John Baldessari, Yoko Ono and Mary Kelly, amongst others, privileged the concept or idea behind the work above other considerations. The separation of form and content is traced back to the Greeks and Christianity, however, Sontag is writing in a time when Conceptual art takes this to its extreme. In contrast to this, during this period American Minimalist artists were making work that they claimed was devoid of content altogether. Despite how art and theory have changed since Sontag wrote this essay, the idea that form and content are distinct still has an enduring influence.
exercise 2.2: changing approach
Think about the way in which you work in the studio – do you begin with form and then allow the subject of the work to emerge, or do you begin with an idea that you then try to show? Your process may not be as clearly defined as this and is likely to be more entangled, but on the whole, are you driven by material qualities, or ideas that are based in language?
Choose an approach that is counter to your usual one. Spend three hours in the studio making an artwork in the medium of your choice. In your sketchbook describe the process and reflect on whether it has given you any insight into the way you work.
Approach
As my previous course was Painting 2, much of what I have been creating has stemmed from the requirements of the course. At the start of the course you are asked to simply do a series of experiments where you might choose to focus on a techniques/ style or subject matter. Later they develop into finished pieces that potentially convey your learning. It was particularly around Part 3 of the course that my research lead to looking at more conceptual works and how creating pieces with a specific purpose or message in mind can often have a greater impact, at least where viewing art critically is concerned. But even though I was trying to work on pieces that have message and intention, I still often approached them by purely focusing on what techniques and style I would use. When I am just experimenting, I might just focus on form in order to refine my techniques and compositional eye. And when I am creating more finalized pieces, I will be more considerate of what content the viewer may be able to take from it.
The piece below was first inspired by subject matter. In Painting 2 I tried to expand my skills in representing males, and in particular, how the male pose can possess a sensual or soft quality. Thus, my first starting point was to find a composition of a male that suits this idea (content). From this I used colour and technique to enhance this idea (form related to content).
Steps:
1. Choose composition and enlarge on canvas with charcoal
2. Start blocking out colours using large flat brushes that allow a more spontaneous and loose representation. I worked in oils mixed with a combination of turps and linseed oil. I blocked out all the large shapes in the first sitting, which took around 2-3 hours.
3. Refine details. I now switched over to smaller flat brushed to help creating more depth or detail. I often use the smaller brushes to drag colours into each other, giving the image a less refined but more energetic feel, which took around 2 hours.
4. Colours were kept quite true to the original photograph, but slightly more vibrant and vivid.
Choose an approach that is counter to your usual one. Spend three hours in the studio making an artwork in the medium of your choice. In your sketchbook describe the process and reflect on whether it has given you any insight into the way you work.
Approach
As my previous course was Painting 2, much of what I have been creating has stemmed from the requirements of the course. At the start of the course you are asked to simply do a series of experiments where you might choose to focus on a techniques/ style or subject matter. Later they develop into finished pieces that potentially convey your learning. It was particularly around Part 3 of the course that my research lead to looking at more conceptual works and how creating pieces with a specific purpose or message in mind can often have a greater impact, at least where viewing art critically is concerned. But even though I was trying to work on pieces that have message and intention, I still often approached them by purely focusing on what techniques and style I would use. When I am just experimenting, I might just focus on form in order to refine my techniques and compositional eye. And when I am creating more finalized pieces, I will be more considerate of what content the viewer may be able to take from it.
The piece below was first inspired by subject matter. In Painting 2 I tried to expand my skills in representing males, and in particular, how the male pose can possess a sensual or soft quality. Thus, my first starting point was to find a composition of a male that suits this idea (content). From this I used colour and technique to enhance this idea (form related to content).
Steps:
1. Choose composition and enlarge on canvas with charcoal
2. Start blocking out colours using large flat brushes that allow a more spontaneous and loose representation. I worked in oils mixed with a combination of turps and linseed oil. I blocked out all the large shapes in the first sitting, which took around 2-3 hours.
3. Refine details. I now switched over to smaller flat brushed to help creating more depth or detail. I often use the smaller brushes to drag colours into each other, giving the image a less refined but more energetic feel, which took around 2 hours.
4. Colours were kept quite true to the original photograph, but slightly more vibrant and vivid.
Reflection
In my in practice I tend to use form and content hand-in-hand. When I choose a composition, it is naturally affiliated with something I find interesting or captivating. I like the human form, but I also like urban settings. I am also quite an emotive person who deeply consider what impact a colour or a particular placement of an object can have on a viewer's perspective. I am trying to develop a style that captures my emotive response and for this to work for me form and content have to be connected. Of course, I cannot speak for the viewer. Someone else looking at my work might only consider form, paying attention to the colours and loose strokes, it may not bother them at all that the choice of subject matter or placement of colour has any significance, albeit subtle. On the other hand, a critic viewing the work purely in search for content, may think that the painting displays a complete lack of content, especially if they were looking for something more overt.
In my in practice I tend to use form and content hand-in-hand. When I choose a composition, it is naturally affiliated with something I find interesting or captivating. I like the human form, but I also like urban settings. I am also quite an emotive person who deeply consider what impact a colour or a particular placement of an object can have on a viewer's perspective. I am trying to develop a style that captures my emotive response and for this to work for me form and content have to be connected. Of course, I cannot speak for the viewer. Someone else looking at my work might only consider form, paying attention to the colours and loose strokes, it may not bother them at all that the choice of subject matter or placement of colour has any significance, albeit subtle. On the other hand, a critic viewing the work purely in search for content, may think that the painting displays a complete lack of content, especially if they were looking for something more overt.
Intellect and the sensual
Sontag argues that the attempt to extract content from form and the privileging of content means that the sensory experience of art is impoverished. The qualities of medium, be they sculptural, spatial, or of surface become secondary. The way that two materials come into contact with each other, or the way that light is captured, for example, may have a powerful effect on you that might evoke sensations/associations. However, this mode of interpretation privileges what the work is trying to say over what it does. To understand the visual through this type of interpretation is like trying to find an equivalent or a translation rather than engaging with what is actually before you.
Sontag argues that the attempt to extract content from form and the privileging of content means that the sensory experience of art is impoverished. The qualities of medium, be they sculptural, spatial, or of surface become secondary. The way that two materials come into contact with each other, or the way that light is captured, for example, may have a powerful effect on you that might evoke sensations/associations. However, this mode of interpretation privileges what the work is trying to say over what it does. To understand the visual through this type of interpretation is like trying to find an equivalent or a translation rather than engaging with what is actually before you.
exercise 2.3: what art does
‘Real art has the capacity to make us nervous. By reducing the work of art to its content and then interpreting that, one tames the work of art. Interpretation makes art manageable, comfortable.’ (Sontag, 1994:8)
Do you agree with the above statement? Consider the work by Helen Chadwick Meat Abstract in relation to Sontag’s claim. Write a paragraph in your learning blog. Think about how you respond to the work – what do you find interesting, powerful, uncomfortable? In what capacity does the work act? What does it do? Write your answers in your learning log.
Do you agree with the above statement? Consider the work by Helen Chadwick Meat Abstract in relation to Sontag’s claim. Write a paragraph in your learning blog. Think about how you respond to the work – what do you find interesting, powerful, uncomfortable? In what capacity does the work act? What does it do? Write your answers in your learning log.
Helen Chadwick
She is a British sculptor, photographer and instillation artist. Her work often consisted of explorations in human life that were controversial or unusual while using unconventional materials. For example, her use of raw meat as a commentary on women being a "consumable product" (Lesso, 2019). The content of her work had a feminist agenda, questioning femininity, gender roles and sex.
Her work can be described as abject. A term first introduced by French literary theorist Julia Kristeva. Abject art explores the differentiation between the self and non-self and involves exploring bodily functions that are considered inappropriate for public display (Tate, 2019)
She is a British sculptor, photographer and instillation artist. Her work often consisted of explorations in human life that were controversial or unusual while using unconventional materials. For example, her use of raw meat as a commentary on women being a "consumable product" (Lesso, 2019). The content of her work had a feminist agenda, questioning femininity, gender roles and sex.
Her work can be described as abject. A term first introduced by French literary theorist Julia Kristeva. Abject art explores the differentiation between the self and non-self and involves exploring bodily functions that are considered inappropriate for public display (Tate, 2019)
Works Cited
Lesso, R. (2019) Helen Chadwick. [online] At: https://www.theartstory.org/artist/chadwick-helen/ (Accessed on 16 December 2019)
Tate (2019) Abject Art. [online] At: https://www.tate.org.uk/art/art-terms/a/abject-art (Accessed on 16 December 2019)
Lesso, R. (2019) Helen Chadwick. [online] At: https://www.theartstory.org/artist/chadwick-helen/ (Accessed on 16 December 2019)
Tate (2019) Abject Art. [online] At: https://www.tate.org.uk/art/art-terms/a/abject-art (Accessed on 16 December 2019)
Reflection
Looking at the two pieces above my immediate sense is the suggestive nature of how the objects have been placed. Even though upon longer inspection you can discern that the objects are meat products from inside the body, your first impression is of them being sexual organs outside the body. The image on the right created with tongues and shellfish makes you particularly uncomfortable at first as they look like male reproductive organs. My initial thoughts when considering form was 'is this really necessary?' 'do I consider it appropriate?'. But as I give myself time to examine the piece and consider meaning, I am able to look past the vulgarity and find a purpose. Thus, considering form and content when looking at these, I would say that they have to work together for these pieces. The choice of material in these installations are particularly important as the raw meat is a confronting reminder of death. If these images were painted for example, I don't think the impact would be as strong. The composition of the photograph is also important is the placement of each object becomes a narrative. Individuals may interpret these in different ways, but for myself the both seem to represent ideas of reproduction, of the sperm searching for the egg. It is this contrast of death (raw meat) and life (reproduction) that makes the work intriguing. Regarding Sontag's quote about interpretation making art manageable and comfortable, I can understand this point of view. If the viewer had no contextual information of why these objects were uses or what the message the artist is trying to convey through them, it is likely that they would simply consider the work vulgar and pointless. However, I cannot agree with Sontag's observation that creating content reduces or tames the work. In this case, I believe that creating content is what gives the work more power. The fact that we are still studying and reviewing this piece of work 30 years on is a testament to how important the interpretation of the pieces are to giving the pieces life and longevity. I also think that her statement brings up a valid point. Whether we are engaged in an art form, or simply sitting in a garden watching a bee land on a flower, there is the danger of forgetting to appreciate what we see and experience in the moment if we begin to over analyze it's meaning.
Looking at the two pieces above my immediate sense is the suggestive nature of how the objects have been placed. Even though upon longer inspection you can discern that the objects are meat products from inside the body, your first impression is of them being sexual organs outside the body. The image on the right created with tongues and shellfish makes you particularly uncomfortable at first as they look like male reproductive organs. My initial thoughts when considering form was 'is this really necessary?' 'do I consider it appropriate?'. But as I give myself time to examine the piece and consider meaning, I am able to look past the vulgarity and find a purpose. Thus, considering form and content when looking at these, I would say that they have to work together for these pieces. The choice of material in these installations are particularly important as the raw meat is a confronting reminder of death. If these images were painted for example, I don't think the impact would be as strong. The composition of the photograph is also important is the placement of each object becomes a narrative. Individuals may interpret these in different ways, but for myself the both seem to represent ideas of reproduction, of the sperm searching for the egg. It is this contrast of death (raw meat) and life (reproduction) that makes the work intriguing. Regarding Sontag's quote about interpretation making art manageable and comfortable, I can understand this point of view. If the viewer had no contextual information of why these objects were uses or what the message the artist is trying to convey through them, it is likely that they would simply consider the work vulgar and pointless. However, I cannot agree with Sontag's observation that creating content reduces or tames the work. In this case, I believe that creating content is what gives the work more power. The fact that we are still studying and reviewing this piece of work 30 years on is a testament to how important the interpretation of the pieces are to giving the pieces life and longevity. I also think that her statement brings up a valid point. Whether we are engaged in an art form, or simply sitting in a garden watching a bee land on a flower, there is the danger of forgetting to appreciate what we see and experience in the moment if we begin to over analyze it's meaning.
Reductive versus descriptive
In order to challenge this mode of interpretation, which reduces art into already existing concepts that substitute the work, Sontag proposes a more thorough description of form. ‘What is needed is a vocabulary – a descriptive, rather than prescriptive, vocabulary – for forms.’ (Sontag, 1994:12) Sontag is referring to a descriptive method that is not based on existing ideas about form, but that is responsive to the work being encountered and allowing for whatever that might entail.
‘Interpretation does not, of course, always prevail. In fact, a great deal of today’s art may be understood as motivated by a flight from interpretation. To avoid interpretation, art may become parody. Or it may become abstract. Or it may become (“merely”) decorative. Or it may become non-art.’ (Sontag, 1994:10)
Sontag is not necessarily opposed to any form of interpretation, but it seems that it is this particular method of decoding, or extracting meaning at the expense of what the viewer perceives and experiences that she objects to. Sontag argues instead for meaning to be revealed through engaging with the encounter with art. In part three you will explore the way in which more contemporary thinkers have taken up this baton and examine experience in more depth.
‘What is important now is to recover our senses. We must learn to see more, to hear more, to feel more….The function of criticism today should be to show how it is what it is, even that it is what it is, rather than show what it means.’ (Sontag, 1994:14)
Many passages from this essay are often quoted, as I have done frequently in this topic, rather than attempting to interpret them. There is something about Sontag’s distinct style that resists this treatment. Perhaps the sensory pleasure of her writing succeeds in dissuading the reader from subjecting it to the type of scrutiny that she rages against in relation to artwork.
In order to challenge this mode of interpretation, which reduces art into already existing concepts that substitute the work, Sontag proposes a more thorough description of form. ‘What is needed is a vocabulary – a descriptive, rather than prescriptive, vocabulary – for forms.’ (Sontag, 1994:12) Sontag is referring to a descriptive method that is not based on existing ideas about form, but that is responsive to the work being encountered and allowing for whatever that might entail.
‘Interpretation does not, of course, always prevail. In fact, a great deal of today’s art may be understood as motivated by a flight from interpretation. To avoid interpretation, art may become parody. Or it may become abstract. Or it may become (“merely”) decorative. Or it may become non-art.’ (Sontag, 1994:10)
Sontag is not necessarily opposed to any form of interpretation, but it seems that it is this particular method of decoding, or extracting meaning at the expense of what the viewer perceives and experiences that she objects to. Sontag argues instead for meaning to be revealed through engaging with the encounter with art. In part three you will explore the way in which more contemporary thinkers have taken up this baton and examine experience in more depth.
‘What is important now is to recover our senses. We must learn to see more, to hear more, to feel more….The function of criticism today should be to show how it is what it is, even that it is what it is, rather than show what it means.’ (Sontag, 1994:14)
Many passages from this essay are often quoted, as I have done frequently in this topic, rather than attempting to interpret them. There is something about Sontag’s distinct style that resists this treatment. Perhaps the sensory pleasure of her writing succeeds in dissuading the reader from subjecting it to the type of scrutiny that she rages against in relation to artwork.
research point 2
Find two art reviews of an exhibition, one that you would describe as using deductive mode of interpretation and another that uses a descriptive one as these terms are discussed in Sontag’s essay. Preferably a review of an exhibition that you have seen recently, if not, one that you would like to see. Compare these to each other and to your own experience of the work (from the exhibition or from images of the work). Reflect upon the comparisons in your sketchbook.
Considering Sontag's views on art being brought back to experience, I wanted to write about the digital art exhibition of Van Gogh's work. Especially considering her point that meaning will be revealed as you experience work. I wanted to see if this idea rings true.
Van Gogh Alive Experience
I visited this exhibition during April of 2019. It has been very popular on social media and there was quite some hype about the show coming to Hong Kong. I have quite a lot of articles about the show but not too many of them that I would necessarily consider an artistic critique. Finding a deductive piece of writing has been particularly difficult. Nonetheless, lets investigate what people had to say.
Exhibition Description
Lets first begin with a description from the official website: https://www.vangoghalive.hk/
"Experience an art exhibition like no other. Transcend time and space as you accompany Vincent van Gogh on a journey through Arles, Saint Rémy and Auvers-sur-Oise, where he created most of his timeless masterpieces. Set to an evocative classical music score, a thrilling display of over 3,000 inspirational images transforms every surface – walls, columns, ceilings and even floors. Adults and children alike will forge their own paths and find their own meaning as they wander through the galleries, exploring hidden nooks, viewing artworks from new angles and discovering unique perspectives."
Most of what is written above has a descriptive tone, however, the phrasing "find their own meaning" is one that stands out. As the audience experiences the display, the find their own responses to it. Interestingly, this lines up very well with what Sontag was trying to say about bringing art back to a sensory experience. The paradox here though is that the audience to having this deeply sensory experience by not even looking at the real original pieces, by a well duplicated and choreographed version of them.
First Review: https://www.rappler.com/life-and-style/arts-and-culture/243433-review-van-gogh-alive-manila
This review is purely descriptive. The author, Cupin (2019), explains what the exhibitions involves by describing the rooms and technology used. No additional anecdotes are given about what they them self experienced. When trying to bring in the general public, I think this type of writing is useful, as most people won't necessarily have extensive knowledge of art history and practices. Museums, galleries and curators can make use of more descriptive writing when promoting works in order to get more viewers.
Second Review: https://www.exberliner.com/whats-on/art/van-gogh-in-3d/
In this review the author, Evans (2015), mostly uses descriptive writing with some ideas that hints at deductive ideas. She uses an interview with Rob Kirk, Grande’s director of exhibitions in Europe, the Middle East and Asia to substantiate some of her thinking. She specifically mentions that the use of new technologies to showcase the work, opens it up for reinterpretation, although the writer never looks into what that reinterpretation is. In the interview, Kirk says that the exhibition is not necessarily meant to draw in your more high-brow museum visitors, but rather those individuals who might generally avoid museums or galleries. Kirk's final thoughts summarizes the purpose of the show well, "We’re not trying to tell a story to people. It’s very much for people to come in and just take what they want from the experience itself. It’s kind of reinventing a traditional museum or exhibition visit, so that hopefully people are engaged and entertained at the same time."
Reflection of both reviews:
Understanding the purpose of the exhibition better, it is clear to see why there are not really any deductive writings available. As the exhibition was drawing in the general public, they would not rely on existing notions of interpreting art and would therefore simply relying on describing it.
Regarding Sontag's writing:
I would still argue that allowing an audience member to create their own meaning and unique experience of art is a form of creating content. I have noted before that I don't really believe you can separate form and content as Sontag suggests. She considers that feeling and experiencing art falls under form, but I would argue that falls under content. A viewer can truly have an emotional response to an art work by creating meaning from it. It does not matter whether that meaning is derived form the subject matter, style, colour or inferred meaning.
I thought it may also be interesting to consider what was said by critics about Van Gogh's original works.
Comparison of what was said about some of his real works:
Interestingly, Van Gogh's works were criticized by the public and his peers of the time for not representing form well enough. Along with other impressionist and expressionist artists who were revolting against academic convention, he was ridiculed for representing topics unrealistically. They laughed at his pieces, with Emil Bernard even referring to his paintings as "mad" (Heinich, 1997). In Van Gogh's case, it was specifically because the early critics diminished his work purely to descriptions of form that meant it had little appeal. They did not consider the technique refined enough. Of course the opinions of his work changed later as the societal expectations of art did. Later he was praised for being a dreamer and inventive artists. As critics began moving away from purely describing the form of art, but also considering the artist them self when analyzing work. Van Gogh's tormented Spirit now became part of understanding his work and suddenly provided new deductive meaning (content) that intrigued viewers.
As with my conclusions regarding form and content, it is important to maintain a balance of descriptive and deductive criticism. Focusing on either one or the other too heavily is more likely to take away from the success/ engagement of a piece.
Considering Sontag's views on art being brought back to experience, I wanted to write about the digital art exhibition of Van Gogh's work. Especially considering her point that meaning will be revealed as you experience work. I wanted to see if this idea rings true.
Van Gogh Alive Experience
I visited this exhibition during April of 2019. It has been very popular on social media and there was quite some hype about the show coming to Hong Kong. I have quite a lot of articles about the show but not too many of them that I would necessarily consider an artistic critique. Finding a deductive piece of writing has been particularly difficult. Nonetheless, lets investigate what people had to say.
Exhibition Description
Lets first begin with a description from the official website: https://www.vangoghalive.hk/
"Experience an art exhibition like no other. Transcend time and space as you accompany Vincent van Gogh on a journey through Arles, Saint Rémy and Auvers-sur-Oise, where he created most of his timeless masterpieces. Set to an evocative classical music score, a thrilling display of over 3,000 inspirational images transforms every surface – walls, columns, ceilings and even floors. Adults and children alike will forge their own paths and find their own meaning as they wander through the galleries, exploring hidden nooks, viewing artworks from new angles and discovering unique perspectives."
Most of what is written above has a descriptive tone, however, the phrasing "find their own meaning" is one that stands out. As the audience experiences the display, the find their own responses to it. Interestingly, this lines up very well with what Sontag was trying to say about bringing art back to a sensory experience. The paradox here though is that the audience to having this deeply sensory experience by not even looking at the real original pieces, by a well duplicated and choreographed version of them.
First Review: https://www.rappler.com/life-and-style/arts-and-culture/243433-review-van-gogh-alive-manila
This review is purely descriptive. The author, Cupin (2019), explains what the exhibitions involves by describing the rooms and technology used. No additional anecdotes are given about what they them self experienced. When trying to bring in the general public, I think this type of writing is useful, as most people won't necessarily have extensive knowledge of art history and practices. Museums, galleries and curators can make use of more descriptive writing when promoting works in order to get more viewers.
Second Review: https://www.exberliner.com/whats-on/art/van-gogh-in-3d/
In this review the author, Evans (2015), mostly uses descriptive writing with some ideas that hints at deductive ideas. She uses an interview with Rob Kirk, Grande’s director of exhibitions in Europe, the Middle East and Asia to substantiate some of her thinking. She specifically mentions that the use of new technologies to showcase the work, opens it up for reinterpretation, although the writer never looks into what that reinterpretation is. In the interview, Kirk says that the exhibition is not necessarily meant to draw in your more high-brow museum visitors, but rather those individuals who might generally avoid museums or galleries. Kirk's final thoughts summarizes the purpose of the show well, "We’re not trying to tell a story to people. It’s very much for people to come in and just take what they want from the experience itself. It’s kind of reinventing a traditional museum or exhibition visit, so that hopefully people are engaged and entertained at the same time."
Reflection of both reviews:
Understanding the purpose of the exhibition better, it is clear to see why there are not really any deductive writings available. As the exhibition was drawing in the general public, they would not rely on existing notions of interpreting art and would therefore simply relying on describing it.
Regarding Sontag's writing:
I would still argue that allowing an audience member to create their own meaning and unique experience of art is a form of creating content. I have noted before that I don't really believe you can separate form and content as Sontag suggests. She considers that feeling and experiencing art falls under form, but I would argue that falls under content. A viewer can truly have an emotional response to an art work by creating meaning from it. It does not matter whether that meaning is derived form the subject matter, style, colour or inferred meaning.
I thought it may also be interesting to consider what was said by critics about Van Gogh's original works.
Comparison of what was said about some of his real works:
Interestingly, Van Gogh's works were criticized by the public and his peers of the time for not representing form well enough. Along with other impressionist and expressionist artists who were revolting against academic convention, he was ridiculed for representing topics unrealistically. They laughed at his pieces, with Emil Bernard even referring to his paintings as "mad" (Heinich, 1997). In Van Gogh's case, it was specifically because the early critics diminished his work purely to descriptions of form that meant it had little appeal. They did not consider the technique refined enough. Of course the opinions of his work changed later as the societal expectations of art did. Later he was praised for being a dreamer and inventive artists. As critics began moving away from purely describing the form of art, but also considering the artist them self when analyzing work. Van Gogh's tormented Spirit now became part of understanding his work and suddenly provided new deductive meaning (content) that intrigued viewers.
As with my conclusions regarding form and content, it is important to maintain a balance of descriptive and deductive criticism. Focusing on either one or the other too heavily is more likely to take away from the success/ engagement of a piece.
Works Cited
Heinich, N. (1997) The Glory of Van Gogh. Princeton University Press
Heinich, N. (1997) The Glory of Van Gogh. Princeton University Press
topic 2: artist and audience
When Marcel Duchamp drew a moustache onto a cheap postcard reproduction of Leonardo da Vinci’s Mona Lisa and presented it as the artwork L.H.O.O.Q. in 1919 he was not only questioning the notion of artist as genius, but also proposing that the viewer actively participates in how meaning is created and asking for the role of the artist within this process to be reconsidered.
Death of the author
In 1967, three years after Sontag’s essay, Roland Barthes wrote his now classic text Death of the Author. Although it primarily refers to literature and literary criticism it applies to all creative production, be it music, art, or film. Going back to the question at the beginning of this part: ‘...but what is it about?’ is the related question: ‘what did the artist mean?’
Death of the author
In 1967, three years after Sontag’s essay, Roland Barthes wrote his now classic text Death of the Author. Although it primarily refers to literature and literary criticism it applies to all creative production, be it music, art, or film. Going back to the question at the beginning of this part: ‘...but what is it about?’ is the related question: ‘what did the artist mean?’
reading point 2
Barthes, R. (1986) ‘Death of the Author’ In: The Rustle of Language. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. pp. 49-55 [online] At: http://www.tbook.constantvzw.org/wp-content/death_authorbarthes.pdf (Accessed on 23.06.18)
Death of the Author
Barthes challenges the idea that there is a ‘secret’, ‘ultimate’ meaning behind the creative work. He argues that the author does not create a ‘new’ or ‘original’ work, but rather that it is a synthesis of many already existing cultural phenomena, current and past, to which the reader is a contributor. The work should not therefore be interpreted through biographical considerations regarding, for instance, the author’s political beliefs, psychological state, ethnicity etc. because this form of interpretation only limits the text. In order to liberate the work, the author must be separated from it. This would mean that the whole notion of authorship would have to be reconsidered, as meaning does not depend upon the author, but in fact, it is created by the reader. (From the Handbook)
Birth of the Reader
According to Barthes meaning is not in the ‘origin’ of the text but in its ‘destination’. Each reader brings his or her own experience to the work and therefore an infinite number of meanings are possible. Meaning might not just be determined by the reader’s age, cultural background, beliefs, the time in which the work is encountered etc., but it can change from one day to the next, as the reader changes. Just as the author’s identity is multiplicitous, the reader’s is equally unstable. Meaning is, therefore fluid and does not reach a tangible endpoint. In fact, it must be forever deferred because it will keep changing. If you think about a single word such as ‘friendship’ or ‘grief’ they will have a different meaning for each individual depending on the reader’s experience; a sentence is even more complex. Now if we consider what happens when visual rather than verbal language is interpreted - with verbal language, there is a degree of consensus in the attempt to assign particular meanings to words, however, with visual language even this starting point is not available. Even if the author did want to control the meaning of the work, it is impossible once deposited into the world. The author has no special power or authority over its meaning, whatever the intentions for the work, it will be perceived how it is perceived. According to Barthes meaning should be ‘disentangled’ rather than ‘deciphered’ to enable it to have life. (From the Handbook)
Additional Notes:
Some additional points from the text.
- When authors write, do they write as themselves and from their own experience, or do the write out of a societal construct or need created which could be outside of themselves. It is interesting to consider this point as an artist as it means you may be able to separate yourself form your role as artist and your role as a person.
The meaning comes from the language used and not the author. If we liken this to visual art for example, it would mean the the tools or the materials play a larger part in creating meaning, rather than the artist.
- The need to to define the author comes from the need to distinguish between classes. This is true in any industry, where people are likely to judge products or outcomes differently according to the status/ class/ authority of the person who made it. Making much of our perceptions around final pieces more about the author's reputation rather that the quality of the work. The story of the Emperor's New Clothes come to mind.
- The true purpose of writing is reading. Here Barthes reveals that the true meaning of a piece will ultimately stem from its viewer.
Reflection
I think Barthe's makes some valid points about the importance of the 'reader' and the danger in placing too much emphasis on the 'author. If we fixate too much on the biography of the artist, we run the risk of forgetting to appreciate the work. As with our discussions around form and content, I think these things require balance. In art, as with language, there are still basic sets of universal truths. These help to guide the viewer to the meaning intended. Certain conventions in writing and language can nearly guarantee that a reader will get the intended meaning and this is also true for conventions in art. Of course, this is assuming that the viewer has had some form of contact or education of these conventions. In the text, Barthes mentions that any language written down is done so with the intent of it being read. That means that from the first work in the sentence, the author would have chosen what word will come next. These decisions would have a specific intent and therefore written with a particular interpretation in mind. The same can be said of how an artists creates. If you know your work is created for the purpose of being seen, you consider every impact and choice when creating. Again, the viewer may still derive their own meaning from works, and this may be dependent on their background. The bigger question artists might want to ask themselves, is whether it matters that viewers find their own meaning. Unless, a work has a specific socio-political agenda, the accuracy in its interpretation shouldn't make a difference.
Thinking back to Part 1 and the research around fluxus artists, it was clear to them them that the audience had to be a part of what was created. Allowing a viewer to form their own interpretations is one way to get them involved. This notion, of course, does work better when considering expressive or abstract styles, as they allow for more interpretation. Creating stories or narratives on the other hand, would require the creator to be more specific with their intent. As a Film and Drama teacher, I regularly discuss the importance of artistic intentions when creating work as it helps to focus choices in order to convey meaning. If meaning was not created in the first place, the viewer would have nothing to 'read' or interpret. So once again, I think that a balance between 'writer' and 'reader' is needed.
Death of the Author
Barthes challenges the idea that there is a ‘secret’, ‘ultimate’ meaning behind the creative work. He argues that the author does not create a ‘new’ or ‘original’ work, but rather that it is a synthesis of many already existing cultural phenomena, current and past, to which the reader is a contributor. The work should not therefore be interpreted through biographical considerations regarding, for instance, the author’s political beliefs, psychological state, ethnicity etc. because this form of interpretation only limits the text. In order to liberate the work, the author must be separated from it. This would mean that the whole notion of authorship would have to be reconsidered, as meaning does not depend upon the author, but in fact, it is created by the reader. (From the Handbook)
Birth of the Reader
According to Barthes meaning is not in the ‘origin’ of the text but in its ‘destination’. Each reader brings his or her own experience to the work and therefore an infinite number of meanings are possible. Meaning might not just be determined by the reader’s age, cultural background, beliefs, the time in which the work is encountered etc., but it can change from one day to the next, as the reader changes. Just as the author’s identity is multiplicitous, the reader’s is equally unstable. Meaning is, therefore fluid and does not reach a tangible endpoint. In fact, it must be forever deferred because it will keep changing. If you think about a single word such as ‘friendship’ or ‘grief’ they will have a different meaning for each individual depending on the reader’s experience; a sentence is even more complex. Now if we consider what happens when visual rather than verbal language is interpreted - with verbal language, there is a degree of consensus in the attempt to assign particular meanings to words, however, with visual language even this starting point is not available. Even if the author did want to control the meaning of the work, it is impossible once deposited into the world. The author has no special power or authority over its meaning, whatever the intentions for the work, it will be perceived how it is perceived. According to Barthes meaning should be ‘disentangled’ rather than ‘deciphered’ to enable it to have life. (From the Handbook)
Additional Notes:
Some additional points from the text.
- When authors write, do they write as themselves and from their own experience, or do the write out of a societal construct or need created which could be outside of themselves. It is interesting to consider this point as an artist as it means you may be able to separate yourself form your role as artist and your role as a person.
The meaning comes from the language used and not the author. If we liken this to visual art for example, it would mean the the tools or the materials play a larger part in creating meaning, rather than the artist.
- The need to to define the author comes from the need to distinguish between classes. This is true in any industry, where people are likely to judge products or outcomes differently according to the status/ class/ authority of the person who made it. Making much of our perceptions around final pieces more about the author's reputation rather that the quality of the work. The story of the Emperor's New Clothes come to mind.
- The true purpose of writing is reading. Here Barthes reveals that the true meaning of a piece will ultimately stem from its viewer.
Reflection
I think Barthe's makes some valid points about the importance of the 'reader' and the danger in placing too much emphasis on the 'author. If we fixate too much on the biography of the artist, we run the risk of forgetting to appreciate the work. As with our discussions around form and content, I think these things require balance. In art, as with language, there are still basic sets of universal truths. These help to guide the viewer to the meaning intended. Certain conventions in writing and language can nearly guarantee that a reader will get the intended meaning and this is also true for conventions in art. Of course, this is assuming that the viewer has had some form of contact or education of these conventions. In the text, Barthes mentions that any language written down is done so with the intent of it being read. That means that from the first work in the sentence, the author would have chosen what word will come next. These decisions would have a specific intent and therefore written with a particular interpretation in mind. The same can be said of how an artists creates. If you know your work is created for the purpose of being seen, you consider every impact and choice when creating. Again, the viewer may still derive their own meaning from works, and this may be dependent on their background. The bigger question artists might want to ask themselves, is whether it matters that viewers find their own meaning. Unless, a work has a specific socio-political agenda, the accuracy in its interpretation shouldn't make a difference.
Thinking back to Part 1 and the research around fluxus artists, it was clear to them them that the audience had to be a part of what was created. Allowing a viewer to form their own interpretations is one way to get them involved. This notion, of course, does work better when considering expressive or abstract styles, as they allow for more interpretation. Creating stories or narratives on the other hand, would require the creator to be more specific with their intent. As a Film and Drama teacher, I regularly discuss the importance of artistic intentions when creating work as it helps to focus choices in order to convey meaning. If meaning was not created in the first place, the viewer would have nothing to 'read' or interpret. So once again, I think that a balance between 'writer' and 'reader' is needed.
exercise 2.4: rereading barthes
Find two different interpretations of Barthes’ Death of the Author, that demonstrate Barthes’ argument. What do they bring to his text? Record your observations in your learning log.
Barthes’ writing played a central role in the Constructivist project – in the same way, that meaning is constructed by society, it can be deconstructed and perpetually reconstituted. It is subsequently no longer the select few who decide what culture is – the task is opened up to anyone who wants to, or, can take part (not everyone has access to cultural production). The implication is that meaning is democratized and marginalised groups can contribute to it. You may want to consider how I interpret various texts presented throughout the course and whether you agree or disagree with my readings. Thinking more broadly, much of the analysis you examine here has origins in Western philosophy and while in Postmodern times it is critiqued, if your cultural heritage does not follow this lineage, you may want to consider the implications of this for you as an artist and viewer/reader. How do philosophical traditions from your region sit alongside Westerns ones and shape cultural production?
First Interpretation
"This ‘death’ is directed, not at the idea of writing, but at the specifically French image of the auteur as a creative genius expressing an inner vision. He is opposing a view of texts as expressing a distinct personality of the author."
"A writer, therefore, does not have a special genius expressed in the text, but rather, is a kind of craftsman who is skilled in using a particular code."
"A text cannot have a single meaning, but rather, is composed of multiple systems through which it is constructed. In Barthes’s case, this means reading texts through the signs they use, both in their structure in the text, and in their wider meanings."
(Robinson, 2011)
Second Interpretation
“The Author” is part of a capitalist stress on control through authority: the authority of the writer him/herself or the authoritative interpretation of privileged interpreter. “The Author” is also part of the Enlightenment stress on individuality that inversely prioritized expertise and uniqueness. An explanation for the work of art would be sought in the person of the producer, his tastes, his history, his passions.
"Barthes wanted only to extend the meaning and interpretation of the work of art to include the interaction of other texts and the responses of the reader."
"To impose an Author upon a text is to impose a brake on interpretation, to give the work a final signified. Writing becomes closed. The “author” becomes a component of reading, a theoretical designation, a fiction employed for the sake of discursive convenience. In other words “Vincent van Gogh” is a capitalist invention suitable for selling art and Ernest Hemingway is a signifier of a particular genre of American writing."
(Willette, 2013)
Reflection
Both authors above have chosen similar parts to myself to interpret. They have both picked up on the idea of language being a set of codes and conventions that have many influences and how Barthes considers this to be part of the reason why the text should stand on its own outside of the author. They have both picked up on the idea that the author's history or biography should not be influencing the viewer's interpretation. Willette in particular provided some good insights around why Barthes would have written this way about the author when considering the time in which the paper was wrote. Within that current social structure, a lot of emphasis was placed on the authority of the author and their role as auteur, which, at the time, did hinder a 'true' evaluation and interpretation of the work.
These reviews do not change the conclusions I made about the text before. In fact, interpreting this article in itself is an example of how the biography and context of the author cannot be ignored when interpreting work. Willette has shown this especially well, as the only way to derive the correct meaning from what Barth intended to say, we need to consider the socio-political context of the time and why he would have been motivated to write these words. I don't think this is exactly transferable to artworks, unless they have a specific agenda. A painting of daisy, may just be a painting of a daisy. Is an interpretation of the daisy or the author who created it really of importance?
I still think it is inherent within all of us to find meaning (or answers) to what we are looking at, and more often than not, understanding where it came from (or who made it), will help us in the quest to finding those answers.
Barthes’ writing played a central role in the Constructivist project – in the same way, that meaning is constructed by society, it can be deconstructed and perpetually reconstituted. It is subsequently no longer the select few who decide what culture is – the task is opened up to anyone who wants to, or, can take part (not everyone has access to cultural production). The implication is that meaning is democratized and marginalised groups can contribute to it. You may want to consider how I interpret various texts presented throughout the course and whether you agree or disagree with my readings. Thinking more broadly, much of the analysis you examine here has origins in Western philosophy and while in Postmodern times it is critiqued, if your cultural heritage does not follow this lineage, you may want to consider the implications of this for you as an artist and viewer/reader. How do philosophical traditions from your region sit alongside Westerns ones and shape cultural production?
First Interpretation
"This ‘death’ is directed, not at the idea of writing, but at the specifically French image of the auteur as a creative genius expressing an inner vision. He is opposing a view of texts as expressing a distinct personality of the author."
"A writer, therefore, does not have a special genius expressed in the text, but rather, is a kind of craftsman who is skilled in using a particular code."
"A text cannot have a single meaning, but rather, is composed of multiple systems through which it is constructed. In Barthes’s case, this means reading texts through the signs they use, both in their structure in the text, and in their wider meanings."
(Robinson, 2011)
Second Interpretation
“The Author” is part of a capitalist stress on control through authority: the authority of the writer him/herself or the authoritative interpretation of privileged interpreter. “The Author” is also part of the Enlightenment stress on individuality that inversely prioritized expertise and uniqueness. An explanation for the work of art would be sought in the person of the producer, his tastes, his history, his passions.
"Barthes wanted only to extend the meaning and interpretation of the work of art to include the interaction of other texts and the responses of the reader."
"To impose an Author upon a text is to impose a brake on interpretation, to give the work a final signified. Writing becomes closed. The “author” becomes a component of reading, a theoretical designation, a fiction employed for the sake of discursive convenience. In other words “Vincent van Gogh” is a capitalist invention suitable for selling art and Ernest Hemingway is a signifier of a particular genre of American writing."
(Willette, 2013)
Reflection
Both authors above have chosen similar parts to myself to interpret. They have both picked up on the idea of language being a set of codes and conventions that have many influences and how Barthes considers this to be part of the reason why the text should stand on its own outside of the author. They have both picked up on the idea that the author's history or biography should not be influencing the viewer's interpretation. Willette in particular provided some good insights around why Barthes would have written this way about the author when considering the time in which the paper was wrote. Within that current social structure, a lot of emphasis was placed on the authority of the author and their role as auteur, which, at the time, did hinder a 'true' evaluation and interpretation of the work.
These reviews do not change the conclusions I made about the text before. In fact, interpreting this article in itself is an example of how the biography and context of the author cannot be ignored when interpreting work. Willette has shown this especially well, as the only way to derive the correct meaning from what Barth intended to say, we need to consider the socio-political context of the time and why he would have been motivated to write these words. I don't think this is exactly transferable to artworks, unless they have a specific agenda. A painting of daisy, may just be a painting of a daisy. Is an interpretation of the daisy or the author who created it really of importance?
I still think it is inherent within all of us to find meaning (or answers) to what we are looking at, and more often than not, understanding where it came from (or who made it), will help us in the quest to finding those answers.
Works cited
Robinson, A. (2011) An A to Z of Theory: Roland Barthes: Death of the Author. [online] At: https://ceasefiremagazine.co.uk/in-theory-barthes-4/ (Accessed on 7 January 2020)
Willette, J. (2013) Roland Barthes: The Death of the Author [online] At: https://arthistoryunstuffed.com/roland-barthes-the-death-of-the-author/ (Accessed on 7 January 2020)
Robinson, A. (2011) An A to Z of Theory: Roland Barthes: Death of the Author. [online] At: https://ceasefiremagazine.co.uk/in-theory-barthes-4/ (Accessed on 7 January 2020)
Willette, J. (2013) Roland Barthes: The Death of the Author [online] At: https://arthistoryunstuffed.com/roland-barthes-the-death-of-the-author/ (Accessed on 7 January 2020)
exercise 2.5: sontag/barthes
Compare the two essays by Sontag and Barthes. This is an opportunity to clarify your thoughts on both these essays and make links and comparisons between them. What do you think the two writers agree and disagree about?
Dialog between me and myself comparing Sontag and Barthes:
Me: The two essays have a common theme, in that both the authors are trying to point out that when we over analyze works (either form the literary or visual arts) we loose the ability to connect to the soul of the piece of work.
Myself: As an art student, I can agree that there is some truth in this. Much of the coursework calls for being overly critical and analytical when researching art works and producing works, which means you reach a point where the work is so intellectual it is no longer enjoyable. You forget to ask yourself whether you actually like what you are looking at.
Me: Yes, I find that especially to be the case when looking at conceptual art. For example, while researching Helen Chadwick I found little aesthetic appeal to her work. Her work in particular would need to be analyzed in order for it to have validity and it is a good example of why you cannot blatantly separate the artist from the art or the form from the content.
Myself: I agree. I have also noticed how the notions put forth in the essay seem to apply better to certain areas or styles of art. For example, if a viewer is simply looking for something calm an appealing to hang in their living room they may purchase a painting composed of nature for example. The viewer's focus would only be aesthetic. The would not find a particular meaning in the topic and would rather pay attention to the colours or styles they prefer. And unless you were a collector or moved in art circles, who the artist is would likely not even play a role in the decision. A collector/ art student/ curator viewing work would likely pay more attention to content, or at least, a combination of the two, as their knowledge an understanding would provide them with a greater insight of what to look for.
Me: This brings up a valid point about art intellectuals. Both these essays were written during a time when artist in Europe and America were pushing the boundaries of what is considered art and what role the artists play in making it, for example, movements like dadaism, fluxus and nouveau realisme. The works they produced cam on the heals of wars or big socio-political revolutions and thus called for a viewer who was able to interpret that.
Myself: Perhaps this shows that both these critics felt that artists had lost their way a bit during this time as they were so obsessed with pushing their ideas, that they forgot about the core conventions of art that appeals to the average viewer.
Me: Bringing these ideas into the 21st century, I would still consider their points valid, as we can run this risk of forgetting to enjoy final products if we over complicate interpreting them. However, I still believe their should be a balance of the two. I mentioned in previous reflections that in order for an artist to create, they need to have an intention, this will give them purpose and the piece purpose.
Myself: Intentions are definitely important for the artist, but then of course, the artist has to acknowledge the fact that not every viewer will understand their intentions. And really, this should not be considered a bad thing, as allowing a viewer to bring their own cultural and historical impacts to the interpretation of a piece is what will make them feel engaged by it.
Me: Of course from an academic point of view, as a student of art, you definitely cannot get away from considering both form and content/ author and reader, a balance is required in order to form critical observations about the work.
Myself: Sontag's writing transfers quite easily to all forms of art, but Barthe's essay is trickier, especially when it comes to film. I mentioned before that it can be difficult to analyze a piece of art without considering some context of the creator, but in film this does not always have to be the case. Understanding who the writer/ director or producers of film are will not necessarily impact on how a film is understood by the audience. When teaching film, I certainly delve into the role of director and their function as auteur, which is especially visible in the style of framing, effects or colour palettes. Film is another area where the reputation of a Director can have a great impact on the reputation of a film. This is again where the laymen and the academics will be divided.
Me: Another interesting aspect about film, is that the audience here will more likely pay attention to content, as they want to be entertained by the story told, while the critics will be paying attention to form as they understand the craft of film making and the effort required to bring a story to the screen.
Myself: So while the audience member of a piece of art has the luxury of deciding whether to focus on form or content, the creator will always need to consider both.
Dialog between me and myself comparing Sontag and Barthes:
Me: The two essays have a common theme, in that both the authors are trying to point out that when we over analyze works (either form the literary or visual arts) we loose the ability to connect to the soul of the piece of work.
Myself: As an art student, I can agree that there is some truth in this. Much of the coursework calls for being overly critical and analytical when researching art works and producing works, which means you reach a point where the work is so intellectual it is no longer enjoyable. You forget to ask yourself whether you actually like what you are looking at.
Me: Yes, I find that especially to be the case when looking at conceptual art. For example, while researching Helen Chadwick I found little aesthetic appeal to her work. Her work in particular would need to be analyzed in order for it to have validity and it is a good example of why you cannot blatantly separate the artist from the art or the form from the content.
Myself: I agree. I have also noticed how the notions put forth in the essay seem to apply better to certain areas or styles of art. For example, if a viewer is simply looking for something calm an appealing to hang in their living room they may purchase a painting composed of nature for example. The viewer's focus would only be aesthetic. The would not find a particular meaning in the topic and would rather pay attention to the colours or styles they prefer. And unless you were a collector or moved in art circles, who the artist is would likely not even play a role in the decision. A collector/ art student/ curator viewing work would likely pay more attention to content, or at least, a combination of the two, as their knowledge an understanding would provide them with a greater insight of what to look for.
Me: This brings up a valid point about art intellectuals. Both these essays were written during a time when artist in Europe and America were pushing the boundaries of what is considered art and what role the artists play in making it, for example, movements like dadaism, fluxus and nouveau realisme. The works they produced cam on the heals of wars or big socio-political revolutions and thus called for a viewer who was able to interpret that.
Myself: Perhaps this shows that both these critics felt that artists had lost their way a bit during this time as they were so obsessed with pushing their ideas, that they forgot about the core conventions of art that appeals to the average viewer.
Me: Bringing these ideas into the 21st century, I would still consider their points valid, as we can run this risk of forgetting to enjoy final products if we over complicate interpreting them. However, I still believe their should be a balance of the two. I mentioned in previous reflections that in order for an artist to create, they need to have an intention, this will give them purpose and the piece purpose.
Myself: Intentions are definitely important for the artist, but then of course, the artist has to acknowledge the fact that not every viewer will understand their intentions. And really, this should not be considered a bad thing, as allowing a viewer to bring their own cultural and historical impacts to the interpretation of a piece is what will make them feel engaged by it.
Me: Of course from an academic point of view, as a student of art, you definitely cannot get away from considering both form and content/ author and reader, a balance is required in order to form critical observations about the work.
Myself: Sontag's writing transfers quite easily to all forms of art, but Barthe's essay is trickier, especially when it comes to film. I mentioned before that it can be difficult to analyze a piece of art without considering some context of the creator, but in film this does not always have to be the case. Understanding who the writer/ director or producers of film are will not necessarily impact on how a film is understood by the audience. When teaching film, I certainly delve into the role of director and their function as auteur, which is especially visible in the style of framing, effects or colour palettes. Film is another area where the reputation of a Director can have a great impact on the reputation of a film. This is again where the laymen and the academics will be divided.
Me: Another interesting aspect about film, is that the audience here will more likely pay attention to content, as they want to be entertained by the story told, while the critics will be paying attention to form as they understand the craft of film making and the effort required to bring a story to the screen.
Myself: So while the audience member of a piece of art has the luxury of deciding whether to focus on form or content, the creator will always need to consider both.
further research
Owens, C. (1992) ‘From Work to Frame, or, Is There Life After “The Death of the Author”?’ In: Beyond Recognition, Representation, Power and Culture. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. pp. 122-139
http://faculty.uml.edu/ksmith/58.350/Documents/Owens_From%20Work%20to%20Frame.pdf
Notes from the article:
- The artist isn't in control of his value
- The critic (viewer) may have a greater desire to find meaning in an artwork than the artist
- the location and manner of display has the potential to supersede the author and viewer in creating meaning
- The writer questions whether art produced for a specific display or to be contained within a specific environment takes on a different purpose. A purpose driven more by capital rather than an appreciation of the piece itself
Refelction
It is clear that when viewing art we need to consider three factors; the artist (author), the viewer (reader) and the 'frame' (how it is shown). It is impossible to formulate an exact conclusion on which of these are more important in the production of art as there are many variables. The type of art, the agenda of the art, the reputation of the artist or location of display etc. These considerations also become different when an artist is creating as their occupation or as their hobby. All of this still ultimately boils down to the one question we struggle to answer: Is it art?
http://faculty.uml.edu/ksmith/58.350/Documents/Owens_From%20Work%20to%20Frame.pdf
Notes from the article:
- The artist isn't in control of his value
- The critic (viewer) may have a greater desire to find meaning in an artwork than the artist
- the location and manner of display has the potential to supersede the author and viewer in creating meaning
- The writer questions whether art produced for a specific display or to be contained within a specific environment takes on a different purpose. A purpose driven more by capital rather than an appreciation of the piece itself
Refelction
It is clear that when viewing art we need to consider three factors; the artist (author), the viewer (reader) and the 'frame' (how it is shown). It is impossible to formulate an exact conclusion on which of these are more important in the production of art as there are many variables. The type of art, the agenda of the art, the reputation of the artist or location of display etc. These considerations also become different when an artist is creating as their occupation or as their hobby. All of this still ultimately boils down to the one question we struggle to answer: Is it art?
topic 3: artist and artwork
Intention, expectation, and realisation
You have looked at how critics and viewers create meaning, now you will examine the complex relationship that artists have with its creation. As you may have experienced, it does not seem to matter what your intention as an artist is; it is the artwork that will have to do the work. It is rare that intention, expectation and realisation line up exactly and this may not necessarily be negative. Often, it is in the gaps between them that artists make discoveries and find insights. Intention and expectation continually shift and change as soon as the making process begins as you saw in Part one.
In the studio, things can take different trajectories. They may go in one direction and not another as a result of chance, distraction, boredom, the behaviour of materials, or any number of factors that may, or may not, be known to the artist. The audience or critic then painstakingly attempts to find meaning in these decisions. Sometimes artists are made to feel like they should know the reasons behind them and even that they must justify them in order to validate the work. Unravelling the reason behind your decisions is not always easy. It is important that the activity of defining and redefining your intentions are ongoing as part of the creative process, because holding on too rigidly to an initial idea may result in a disjuncture between the intention and the work. This can often be a problem if you start with an idea or issue and then try to translate it into a visual language. There is a lot that goes into the work that cannot be seen – thinking, research, failures, etc. Because of the personal nature of your investment in the work, it is not possible to view it from outside the experience of making it, as the audience would. The artist must try to keep looking at the work with fresh eyes as if they did not have the knowledge of its genesis and an attachment to it.
You have looked at how critics and viewers create meaning, now you will examine the complex relationship that artists have with its creation. As you may have experienced, it does not seem to matter what your intention as an artist is; it is the artwork that will have to do the work. It is rare that intention, expectation and realisation line up exactly and this may not necessarily be negative. Often, it is in the gaps between them that artists make discoveries and find insights. Intention and expectation continually shift and change as soon as the making process begins as you saw in Part one.
In the studio, things can take different trajectories. They may go in one direction and not another as a result of chance, distraction, boredom, the behaviour of materials, or any number of factors that may, or may not, be known to the artist. The audience or critic then painstakingly attempts to find meaning in these decisions. Sometimes artists are made to feel like they should know the reasons behind them and even that they must justify them in order to validate the work. Unravelling the reason behind your decisions is not always easy. It is important that the activity of defining and redefining your intentions are ongoing as part of the creative process, because holding on too rigidly to an initial idea may result in a disjuncture between the intention and the work. This can often be a problem if you start with an idea or issue and then try to translate it into a visual language. There is a lot that goes into the work that cannot be seen – thinking, research, failures, etc. Because of the personal nature of your investment in the work, it is not possible to view it from outside the experience of making it, as the audience would. The artist must try to keep looking at the work with fresh eyes as if they did not have the knowledge of its genesis and an attachment to it.
research point 3
Gaining an understanding of what you do and being able to talk about it are skills that develop with your practice. For some artists, this constitutes a natural part of the making process, for others, it may be necessary at a later stage in order to deliver an artists’ talk or work with a gallery. It can also be the case that certain insights about the work and its motivations only come into view once considered in relation to other work – as it becomes a body of work, or perhaps months or many years after the work was made.
Use the links suggested below, if you can, then continue your own research into the creative process of William Kentridge:
Kentridge, W. (2014) ‘William Kentridge Interview: How We Make Sense of the World’ In: Youtube.com 01.10.14 [online] At:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G11wOmxoJ6U (Accessed on 27.06.18)
Kentridge, W. (2016) ‘The creative process of a master artist, William Kentridge’ In: Tedx Talks 15.11.16 [online] At:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmaXqktW3A8 (Accessed on 27.06.18)
Notes and reflections from the interviews above:
- an artist's biography can be written from their failures
- the artist found meaning in the connection between various art forms and stopped trying to define the work exactly, he uses plays, films, paintings, poetry etc.
- he is very interested in the creative process and how our thinking impacts the way we make sense of the world. He believes that an important part of that is uncertainty. The artist should be open to allowing a work to grow and change, he talks about a first idea being a line (or stream), but we should not stay stuck in that one stream, but allow it to branch into various areas, whatever that might mean in your practice.
- an artist needs to be able to step back an look at their work and then also allow for chance. Don't let a set plan hinder the work.
- he mentions that there is also a complicated relationship with the viewer, as you might create something you consider to be be beautiful, but it does not resonate with the viewer.
- he brings up the point of the artist not being able to create without his own biographical thinking, showing the importance of the role the artist plays in creating meaning
- he talks about finding the 'less good idea'. This means that even if you have an idea as a starting point, you need to allow the material to change or shape this idea. In other words, don't fixate on what you know works, try out techniques and strategies that you don't know work.
- your memories and experiences form an integral part in constructing meaning.
Looking at a completed piece by Kentridge, 2nd Hand Reading:
Kentridge, W. (2013) 2nd Hand Reading. [online] At: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEfUjg5viGk (Accessed on 13 January 2020)
The work is really fascinating and it is tough to consider how many discouraged him from being an artist when you look at what he has created. It is especially clear that the images in his work has personal meaning. Understanding the South African history and culture is definetly something that comes our thematically, especially the shift in relationships between the people in SA. The wonderful thing about putting it in a film like this, is the narrative it creates when its moving. How images are timed, when they are shown, how text is added to say what images can't. It plays out like a symphony, with Kentridge conducting. It is a great example of how Sontag's and Barthe's essays missed the point. In this piece, finding meaning in the author, form and content, is what makes the piece so captivating for the viewer..
Use the links suggested below, if you can, then continue your own research into the creative process of William Kentridge:
Kentridge, W. (2014) ‘William Kentridge Interview: How We Make Sense of the World’ In: Youtube.com 01.10.14 [online] At:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G11wOmxoJ6U (Accessed on 27.06.18)
Kentridge, W. (2016) ‘The creative process of a master artist, William Kentridge’ In: Tedx Talks 15.11.16 [online] At:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmaXqktW3A8 (Accessed on 27.06.18)
Notes and reflections from the interviews above:
- an artist's biography can be written from their failures
- the artist found meaning in the connection between various art forms and stopped trying to define the work exactly, he uses plays, films, paintings, poetry etc.
- he is very interested in the creative process and how our thinking impacts the way we make sense of the world. He believes that an important part of that is uncertainty. The artist should be open to allowing a work to grow and change, he talks about a first idea being a line (or stream), but we should not stay stuck in that one stream, but allow it to branch into various areas, whatever that might mean in your practice.
- an artist needs to be able to step back an look at their work and then also allow for chance. Don't let a set plan hinder the work.
- he mentions that there is also a complicated relationship with the viewer, as you might create something you consider to be be beautiful, but it does not resonate with the viewer.
- he brings up the point of the artist not being able to create without his own biographical thinking, showing the importance of the role the artist plays in creating meaning
- he talks about finding the 'less good idea'. This means that even if you have an idea as a starting point, you need to allow the material to change or shape this idea. In other words, don't fixate on what you know works, try out techniques and strategies that you don't know work.
- your memories and experiences form an integral part in constructing meaning.
Looking at a completed piece by Kentridge, 2nd Hand Reading:
Kentridge, W. (2013) 2nd Hand Reading. [online] At: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEfUjg5viGk (Accessed on 13 January 2020)
The work is really fascinating and it is tough to consider how many discouraged him from being an artist when you look at what he has created. It is especially clear that the images in his work has personal meaning. Understanding the South African history and culture is definetly something that comes our thematically, especially the shift in relationships between the people in SA. The wonderful thing about putting it in a film like this, is the narrative it creates when its moving. How images are timed, when they are shown, how text is added to say what images can't. It plays out like a symphony, with Kentridge conducting. It is a great example of how Sontag's and Barthe's essays missed the point. In this piece, finding meaning in the author, form and content, is what makes the piece so captivating for the viewer..
exercise 2.6 unraveling
Choose an artwork that you have produced during the course. In your sketchbook map the intentions, decisions, expectations you had for the work, how they changed during making it. Think about the types of decisions you made – were they formal, practical, material-led, emotional, intuitive or do they inhabit other categories? Do you think you realised the work in the way that you intended? Is it possible to fully know your intentions?
The work I have chosen is a piece that I recently created for a close friend as a birthday gift. A lot of my work is of the female form as I appreciate the femininity and sensuality of it. As she has seen many of my works, she commented about having a portrait of herself in a similar sensual fashion.
I chose this piece, because it brings up another interesting point when considering the meaning of artworks. Pieces that are commissioned or made for specific purposes may require a different approach or dictate different techniques. This is certainly something we saw during the14th to 19th centuries when patrons played the largest role in determining the subject matter and thus 'meaning' of the pieces they commissioned. That being said, there is still a reason why certain artists were more popular than others, as their specific technique or interpretation of subject matter adds another layer of meaning to it.
Creating the piece:
My intentions
As this is a very close friend, I not only wanted to capture her physical beauty, but also that of her character. I wanted the portrait to portray that she is a sensual, beautiful woman, but that her beauty is deeper than that. This is not necessarily an easy thing to do when painting a nude portrait.
Decisions
Knowing the above, it meant I had to consider how my technique and chosen composition would add to my subjects character. As the portrait was meant to be a surprise, I had to sift through photographs to find images that could help me in creating the right composition. While sifting through them I considered what I consider to be her strengths. She is kind, strong, smart and generous. She is also an artist and likes considering ideas deeply (so no pressure!). I then thought about a pose that represents this. I often paint females on couches or on beds, but this does not suit the description here. A woman who is confident would be standing, her shoulders would be strong and she would be confronting the viewer. I found photographs that matched the posture I was looking for and then began sketching the composition to see if it works.
I chose this piece, because it brings up another interesting point when considering the meaning of artworks. Pieces that are commissioned or made for specific purposes may require a different approach or dictate different techniques. This is certainly something we saw during the14th to 19th centuries when patrons played the largest role in determining the subject matter and thus 'meaning' of the pieces they commissioned. That being said, there is still a reason why certain artists were more popular than others, as their specific technique or interpretation of subject matter adds another layer of meaning to it.
Creating the piece:
My intentions
As this is a very close friend, I not only wanted to capture her physical beauty, but also that of her character. I wanted the portrait to portray that she is a sensual, beautiful woman, but that her beauty is deeper than that. This is not necessarily an easy thing to do when painting a nude portrait.
Decisions
Knowing the above, it meant I had to consider how my technique and chosen composition would add to my subjects character. As the portrait was meant to be a surprise, I had to sift through photographs to find images that could help me in creating the right composition. While sifting through them I considered what I consider to be her strengths. She is kind, strong, smart and generous. She is also an artist and likes considering ideas deeply (so no pressure!). I then thought about a pose that represents this. I often paint females on couches or on beds, but this does not suit the description here. A woman who is confident would be standing, her shoulders would be strong and she would be confronting the viewer. I found photographs that matched the posture I was looking for and then began sketching the composition to see if it works.
The sketch shows her gazing to the side which is not exactly confronting, but I like the fact that she is gazing to the distance as this represents her soulful side. Her bare chest facing forward still meets the idea of confrontation. Next I had to choose which medium I would work in. I work in watercolours and oils and both have different traits. I actually started compositions in both mediums to see which provided a more poetic and sensual feel. The watercolour with its softer tones and movements was a better choice for highlighting her sensuality. As I mentioned before, even when creating something that a 'viewer' specifically asked for, it is the artist who chooses tools, colours, styles and compositions and each individual choice leads to meaning. When I work with watercolours in general, I do follow some of the basic application rules, like working light to dark, but mostly I work intuitively. As I allow the colours to run it means making one stroke at a time, as I need to see where the paint goes. This helps me decide where to make the next mark. Fortunately watercolour dries fast. I chose to work in blue as there is something calming yet strong about this colour. I wanted the painting to feel like it was moving, as this is a means of capturing the spirit of the subject (my friend). Though there are areas of great detail, there are also areas that are less defined, which engages the viewer's imagination and hopefully makes the composition more intriguing. I want the viewer to be captivated, as I believe my friend to be captivating. |
As an artist I am generally nervous when I create, as I always have a fear of messing things up, this is even more true when creating a surprise gift for someone. There were many moments where I made some marks and then walked away. There were a few times I made choices and deeply regretted them, and in the process of trying to fix them I ended up overworking some areas, especially around the face, which is more than I wanted to do. It was difficult to find that moment when the work was finished, but I finally forced myself to just walk away and place the piece over into the viewers hands (she loved it, by the way).
Looking at your own work is a difficult thing as you only notice the mistakes you made. Perhaps this is why having viewers who can find their own meaning is a good thing, as it may take away pressure from the artist.
research point 4
Listen to 3 different episodes of your choice of artists exploring their process in the studio:
‘In the Studio’ In: bbc.co.uk [online] At: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p04vfd0x/episodes/player (Accessed on 27.06.18)
‘In the Studio’ In: bbc.co.uk [online] At: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p04vfd0x/episodes/player (Accessed on 27.06.18)
Tamara Kvesitadze
She is a sculptor who combines ideas from theater, philosophy and visual art to create her pieces. She has a fascination with movement and likes to juxtapose elements to create poetic contrasts. Like hard and soft materials, rigid lines with fluid shapes or something innocent with something dark, like the piece Red (2013). Her work "embraces a focus on mutating processes in the comprehension of the powers and desires of humankind" (Universe in Universe, 2011). This combination of material and ideas mean that her pieces have a great sense of evolution, metamorphosis or mutation.
Other pieces like Man and Woman (2007) combine sculpture and engineering. Statues are usually a static moment, but creating statues that move, give them a sense of performance. In the podcast Tamara Kvesitadze talks about this sculpture representing love and loss and what it looks like when two people have shared 'a moment' together. Additional research also indicates that she was inspired by an Austrian Novel, Ali and Nino which is about two lovers who due to tragic circumstances are kept apart (Atlas Obscura, 2020). Kvesitadze works with a combination of materials, but these large sculptures mostly combine metals. She also collaborates with an engineer to help her with the movement aspects of the sculpture. Her pieces first begin as sketches and watercolours. Then smaller clay model versions are created and tested in the studio. 3D printers, 3D scanners and 3D model drawings are used in combination with the models created to figure out the movement and operation of the piece.
Kvesitadze especially made a comment about the difficulty in knowing when a piece is done and this is certainly an area that I myself find difficult. Finding the moment when you step back and let go.
She is a sculptor who combines ideas from theater, philosophy and visual art to create her pieces. She has a fascination with movement and likes to juxtapose elements to create poetic contrasts. Like hard and soft materials, rigid lines with fluid shapes or something innocent with something dark, like the piece Red (2013). Her work "embraces a focus on mutating processes in the comprehension of the powers and desires of humankind" (Universe in Universe, 2011). This combination of material and ideas mean that her pieces have a great sense of evolution, metamorphosis or mutation.
Other pieces like Man and Woman (2007) combine sculpture and engineering. Statues are usually a static moment, but creating statues that move, give them a sense of performance. In the podcast Tamara Kvesitadze talks about this sculpture representing love and loss and what it looks like when two people have shared 'a moment' together. Additional research also indicates that she was inspired by an Austrian Novel, Ali and Nino which is about two lovers who due to tragic circumstances are kept apart (Atlas Obscura, 2020). Kvesitadze works with a combination of materials, but these large sculptures mostly combine metals. She also collaborates with an engineer to help her with the movement aspects of the sculpture. Her pieces first begin as sketches and watercolours. Then smaller clay model versions are created and tested in the studio. 3D printers, 3D scanners and 3D model drawings are used in combination with the models created to figure out the movement and operation of the piece.
Kvesitadze especially made a comment about the difficulty in knowing when a piece is done and this is certainly an area that I myself find difficult. Finding the moment when you step back and let go.
Works cited
Atlas Obscura (2020) Ali and Nino. [online] At: https://www.atlasobscura.com/places/ali-and-nino (Accessed on 14 January 2020)
Universe in Universe (2011) Tamara Kvesitadze: Any-medium-whatever. [online] At: https://universes.art/en/venice-biennale/2011/tour/georgia (Accessed on 14 January 2020)
Atlas Obscura (2020) Ali and Nino. [online] At: https://www.atlasobscura.com/places/ali-and-nino (Accessed on 14 January 2020)
Universe in Universe (2011) Tamara Kvesitadze: Any-medium-whatever. [online] At: https://universes.art/en/venice-biennale/2011/tour/georgia (Accessed on 14 January 2020)
Victor Ehikhamenor
He is a Nigerian artist who works in multiple mediums, including painting, drawing, photography, sculpture, writing and installation. "His works are influenced by the duality of African traditional religion and the interception of Western beliefs, memories, and nostalgia (Ehikhamenor, 2019). His work is type of abstract story telling and generally relies on repetitive forms or symbols. " Storytelling is an important element of the artist’s practice, whether the magic realism of memory and nostalgia, or biting criticism of history and politics (Tyburn Gallery, 2016). He often relies on symbolism and iconography which we can especially see in his series of pieces made with rosary beads. The rosary beads are sewn onto large black canvases. The artist chose to use these as Catholicism is large part of the culture in Nigeria and of the artists upbringing. The images are portraits and they combine the catholic religion with aspects of Nigerian Culture. They create an interesting juxtaposition between religion and culture, or as they refer to it, pagan. The catholic religion has its origins from somewhere else, while Nigeria's culture will have its own roots and expressions and this is shown through the people he has chosen to represent in his portraits. He is exploring what happens when you relate one aspect of religion to 'pagan' aspects of culture. He has taken much inspiration from the markets where he buys his materials and by walking the streets of his neighborhood.
He is a Nigerian artist who works in multiple mediums, including painting, drawing, photography, sculpture, writing and installation. "His works are influenced by the duality of African traditional religion and the interception of Western beliefs, memories, and nostalgia (Ehikhamenor, 2019). His work is type of abstract story telling and generally relies on repetitive forms or symbols. " Storytelling is an important element of the artist’s practice, whether the magic realism of memory and nostalgia, or biting criticism of history and politics (Tyburn Gallery, 2016). He often relies on symbolism and iconography which we can especially see in his series of pieces made with rosary beads. The rosary beads are sewn onto large black canvases. The artist chose to use these as Catholicism is large part of the culture in Nigeria and of the artists upbringing. The images are portraits and they combine the catholic religion with aspects of Nigerian Culture. They create an interesting juxtaposition between religion and culture, or as they refer to it, pagan. The catholic religion has its origins from somewhere else, while Nigeria's culture will have its own roots and expressions and this is shown through the people he has chosen to represent in his portraits. He is exploring what happens when you relate one aspect of religion to 'pagan' aspects of culture. He has taken much inspiration from the markets where he buys his materials and by walking the streets of his neighborhood.
Works cited
Ehikhamenor, V. (2019) Victor Ehikhamenor. [online] At: http://victorehi.com/victor/ (Accessed on 14 January 2020)
Tyburn Gallery (2016) Victor Ehikhamenor. [online] At: http://www.tyburngallery.com/artist/victor-ehikhamenor/ (Accessed on 14 January 2020)
Ehikhamenor, V. (2019) Victor Ehikhamenor. [online] At: http://victorehi.com/victor/ (Accessed on 14 January 2020)
Tyburn Gallery (2016) Victor Ehikhamenor. [online] At: http://www.tyburngallery.com/artist/victor-ehikhamenor/ (Accessed on 14 January 2020)
Lynette Wallworth
This Australian artist creates immersive instellations and films. Her work explores the fragile relationships beween man and nature. Her virtual films in particular create an immersive and engaging environment where the viewer becomes a part of the narrative in how we realte to each other and our environments. Her latest film Awavena is about the indigenous Yamanawa people and explores their relationship with their country (their home) and the forest. The tribes meditate with medicines which creat a state of seeing visions. Wallworth uses virtual reality to augment what this experience is like through the eyes of Hushahu, a female shaman (Acosta, 2019). Through this story we see a radical change in this tribes previous traditions and approaches to spirituality.
The creative process:
To begin the work the artist was first invited to the village to meet with the elder. He shared how the tribe experiences their visions and described them as portals and invited the crew to participate as well. These interactions would have been valuable research for the filmmaker in understanding their traditions and ways of life, an integral part of creating an immersive documentary. The next step would be to film the tribe during their ceremonies. It was during these ceremonies that the virtual world would be needed to help the audience to step into to the 'vision' world. An audience will watch the film first that documents the tribe and then a second experience where the use VR to step into the portal. She works with a digital artist to help design the scene they want to create. Coneptual sketches and model making helps to formalize the image she wants to create and it is a clear collaboration between herself, the tribe and the digital artist and game developer. Technology plays an integral part, they have a backpack computer and headset which helps give the audience mobility, so the don't only see the moving images, but that they actually move through it. The technology responds to your movement and interactions. They use a type of 'depth kit' to create their 3D images for the VR and it is like a type of hologram. What is unique about it is that you can see the character from the film. It is a uniwue way to share the experience and connection between a tribe member.
This Australian artist creates immersive instellations and films. Her work explores the fragile relationships beween man and nature. Her virtual films in particular create an immersive and engaging environment where the viewer becomes a part of the narrative in how we realte to each other and our environments. Her latest film Awavena is about the indigenous Yamanawa people and explores their relationship with their country (their home) and the forest. The tribes meditate with medicines which creat a state of seeing visions. Wallworth uses virtual reality to augment what this experience is like through the eyes of Hushahu, a female shaman (Acosta, 2019). Through this story we see a radical change in this tribes previous traditions and approaches to spirituality.
The creative process:
To begin the work the artist was first invited to the village to meet with the elder. He shared how the tribe experiences their visions and described them as portals and invited the crew to participate as well. These interactions would have been valuable research for the filmmaker in understanding their traditions and ways of life, an integral part of creating an immersive documentary. The next step would be to film the tribe during their ceremonies. It was during these ceremonies that the virtual world would be needed to help the audience to step into to the 'vision' world. An audience will watch the film first that documents the tribe and then a second experience where the use VR to step into the portal. She works with a digital artist to help design the scene they want to create. Coneptual sketches and model making helps to formalize the image she wants to create and it is a clear collaboration between herself, the tribe and the digital artist and game developer. Technology plays an integral part, they have a backpack computer and headset which helps give the audience mobility, so the don't only see the moving images, but that they actually move through it. The technology responds to your movement and interactions. They use a type of 'depth kit' to create their 3D images for the VR and it is like a type of hologram. What is unique about it is that you can see the character from the film. It is a uniwue way to share the experience and connection between a tribe member.
Works Cited
Acosta, B. (2019) Artist and director Lynette Wallworth uses virtual reality to forge cultural connections through film. [online] At: https://www.columbiaspectator.com/arts-and-entertainment/2019/04/22/artist-and-director-lynette-wallworth-uses-virtual-reality-to-forge-cultural-connections-through-film/ (Accessed on 16 January 2019)
Acosta, B. (2019) Artist and director Lynette Wallworth uses virtual reality to forge cultural connections through film. [online] At: https://www.columbiaspectator.com/arts-and-entertainment/2019/04/22/artist-and-director-lynette-wallworth-uses-virtual-reality-to-forge-cultural-connections-through-film/ (Accessed on 16 January 2019)
Reflecting on the three chosen artists:
Though each of these artist work in very different mediums there are many commonalities in their creative process.
- They all find inspiration from their environment, especially the poeple around them
- Any new idea or inspiration is followed by research. This research may invovlde observation, sketching, testing ideas, etc.
- All of these works involved a collaboration. As each of them explored mixed media works, collaboration with others were an essential part of bringing their idea to life.
- Each of these artists discuss their intentions. They have a vision and an idea and this drives how they choose to form and shape their final pieces, meaning that they have an expectation of how they want the viewer to experience the work.
It is clear from these observations that once again Form and Content/ Author and Reader have to work together in the creation of art. At different stages of the creation process form might be of more importance as the artist allows the media they are working with to dictate the work. At other times content takes president, is the artist considers the message they want the viewer to recieve and how that is best represented thourhg specific choices. In all three the examples above, the starting point was definitely content and from here colours, shapes, compositions etc. (form) came into play.
Though each of these artist work in very different mediums there are many commonalities in their creative process.
- They all find inspiration from their environment, especially the poeple around them
- Any new idea or inspiration is followed by research. This research may invovlde observation, sketching, testing ideas, etc.
- All of these works involved a collaboration. As each of them explored mixed media works, collaboration with others were an essential part of bringing their idea to life.
- Each of these artists discuss their intentions. They have a vision and an idea and this drives how they choose to form and shape their final pieces, meaning that they have an expectation of how they want the viewer to experience the work.
It is clear from these observations that once again Form and Content/ Author and Reader have to work together in the creation of art. At different stages of the creation process form might be of more importance as the artist allows the media they are working with to dictate the work. At other times content takes president, is the artist considers the message they want the viewer to recieve and how that is best represented thourhg specific choices. In all three the examples above, the starting point was definitely content and from here colours, shapes, compositions etc. (form) came into play.
Ambiguity and vagueness
Occasionally work does not leave much room for different types of interpretation because it has an explicit subject matter or message. Perhaps this is more likely for text-based work, but on the whole, most work by its very nature is ambiguous even when it does contain verbal language. Even if the subject matter of the work is obvious, it is still possible to find different meanings within it.
Occasionally work does not leave much room for different types of interpretation because it has an explicit subject matter or message. Perhaps this is more likely for text-based work, but on the whole, most work by its very nature is ambiguous even when it does contain verbal language. Even if the subject matter of the work is obvious, it is still possible to find different meanings within it.
exercise 2.7: Interpretations
Write a list in your learning log of as many different possible interpretations you can think of for Andy Warhol’s Electric Chair.
Andy Warhol's Electric Chair is a series of screen prints of and electric chair created in 1971. Without considering any research here are some possible interpretations from my own understanding and context.
1 - The artist found the object interesting and therefore took a photo, as any of us might do when we see something for the first time.
2 - It could be a commentary on our fascination with death and the macab
3 - It could be a political statement about the death penalty
4 - It could be referring to man's god complex, as we use the chair to decide who must die
5 - It could be a means of provoking the audience to consider our relationship with criminals and their treatment
6 - Considering the artist is moslty associated with pop culture works, the piece might represent how we have made objects like this part of the everyday and no longer flinch or consider this object't purpose. That we have become desencitized.
7 - It could also be that the artist is simply questioning what art is, as the fluxus or dada movements of the time
Out of intereset I did some research to find out what others have said about the intentions. Sherwing (2017) writes that it was part of his Death and Destruction series that shows how the media normalizes death and distruction, which is similar to my thoughts in point 6. Masterworks Fine Arts (2019) writes that the series plays on the human fascination with death and violence while also confronting the viewer to consider the purpose of the object, which is what I suggested in points 1 and 5.
1 - The artist found the object interesting and therefore took a photo, as any of us might do when we see something for the first time.
2 - It could be a commentary on our fascination with death and the macab
3 - It could be a political statement about the death penalty
4 - It could be referring to man's god complex, as we use the chair to decide who must die
5 - It could be a means of provoking the audience to consider our relationship with criminals and their treatment
6 - Considering the artist is moslty associated with pop culture works, the piece might represent how we have made objects like this part of the everyday and no longer flinch or consider this object't purpose. That we have become desencitized.
7 - It could also be that the artist is simply questioning what art is, as the fluxus or dada movements of the time
Out of intereset I did some research to find out what others have said about the intentions. Sherwing (2017) writes that it was part of his Death and Destruction series that shows how the media normalizes death and distruction, which is similar to my thoughts in point 6. Masterworks Fine Arts (2019) writes that the series plays on the human fascination with death and violence while also confronting the viewer to consider the purpose of the object, which is what I suggested in points 1 and 5.
Works Cited
Masterworks Fine Arts (2019) Andy Warhol’s Electric Chairs Series, 1971. [online] https://www.masterworksfineart.com/educational-resources/andy-warhol/andy-warhols-electric-chairs-1971-series/ (Accessed on 18 January 2020)
Sherwig, S. (2017)Andy Warhol's Electric Chair, 1964: A Dark Mirror to Pop Art. [online] At:https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2017/mar/24/andy-warhol-electric-chair-1964-pop-art-american-dream (Accessed on 18 January 2020)
Masterworks Fine Arts (2019) Andy Warhol’s Electric Chairs Series, 1971. [online] https://www.masterworksfineart.com/educational-resources/andy-warhol/andy-warhols-electric-chairs-1971-series/ (Accessed on 18 January 2020)
Sherwig, S. (2017)Andy Warhol's Electric Chair, 1964: A Dark Mirror to Pop Art. [online] At:https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2017/mar/24/andy-warhol-electric-chair-1964-pop-art-american-dream (Accessed on 18 January 2020)
The Challenges of Interpretations (From the Guide)
As you have observed, trying to assign meaning to visual language is complicated. Work that is based in ideas might be easier to define and discuss, whereas material based work that is more sensory, can be more resistant to language. Despite the difficulties posed and the sometimes unsatisfactory nature of using one type of language to talk about another, it cannot be avoided. Artists such as Robert Smithson, Martha Rosler, Louise Lawler, Allan Kaprow and in particular many American Minimalist artists made writing a part of their practice as a means to direct how the work they made was framed and talked about. Many artists also use text itself as a material. Or, you can give language material form - the artist Michael Dean often uses his own writing as a starting point, abstracting his words into an alphabet of human scale using materials such as concrete, sand, steel, and tape. Other methods of directing meaning include a title or taking part in artists’ talks/interviews. To an extent, the artist can decide how they control the terms in which their work is framed and discussed. You may want to consider how the artwork operates without the apparatus involved in interpreting, critiquing and marketing it. It is not uncommon that more time is spent reading the interpretation of the work in a gallery than experiencing the work itself. Sometimes, it can feel as if the work and the text describing it are somewhat unrelated. If the discourses around the work are absent, how does this change the way you respond to a work?
It is also possible to go in the other direction and have no clear intention for the work. According to artist and teacher Graham Crowley there is a distinction between ‘ambiguity and vaguery’ (Crowley, 2009:129). Many artists deliberately avoid the possibility of fixing meaning in an explicit way, but at the same time maintain a specific identity for the work. The desire for the work to be open to different possible meanings is not the same as not knowing what you want for it. On the other hand, to not have thought about particular aspects of the work, or not to know whether something works in the way that you want it to, would constitute vagueness.
‘“Getting it right” or “finding it” is dependent upon a loss of control. I don’t want to be in control in those evolutionary beginnings to make something – I want to catch up with it – or catch it.’ (Wilding, 2004:82)
As you explored in part one, there is a balance to be struck between harnessing uncertainty during the creative process and at some time reaching for something not necessarily, certain, but close to what you want. It might not be easy to verbally articulate why something ‘feels right’, yet it will probably be the result of a process that comes from experience. This ability might be referred to as intuition, which can be derided as less valid than other types of ‘logical’ decision making processes, but intuition is not arbitrary or ungrounded but based in praxis. This involves following a path of inquiry, (some of which may be evident in the work) and having some awareness of what this is and how it could be perceived. This could be one of the differences between art and something that might look like art.
‘If I theorize about what is going on in my art, I do so after the making of it. As I think I’ve said before, An artist might become frightened by what he has done. He’s alone with the work and will seek reassurance from himself. Take the paintings that were shown at the Venice Biennale in 1966 – I guess you can call them window-shaped with a monochrome surface, but with drawing at the edge. I looked at them and I said, “Well it makes, I believe, perfect sense. Yes, the edge of the shape can be seen as a drawing, as line.” But when I did it I surely wasn’t thinking of that. I felt impelled to do it and to see what it would look like, and it pleased me.’ (Olitski, 2010:210)
Reflection
This final quote by Olitski resonates with me. Often when I am painting I also do it from a place of curiosity, simply wanting to see what it will look like. Every artist has a style, a type of technique or colour preference which is often a thread in their work. As mentioned above, this likely developed from repitition and practice and does not necessarily dictate or ask for meaning. I for one would hope that there are times when artists simply do something because they enjoy or like it.
As you have observed, trying to assign meaning to visual language is complicated. Work that is based in ideas might be easier to define and discuss, whereas material based work that is more sensory, can be more resistant to language. Despite the difficulties posed and the sometimes unsatisfactory nature of using one type of language to talk about another, it cannot be avoided. Artists such as Robert Smithson, Martha Rosler, Louise Lawler, Allan Kaprow and in particular many American Minimalist artists made writing a part of their practice as a means to direct how the work they made was framed and talked about. Many artists also use text itself as a material. Or, you can give language material form - the artist Michael Dean often uses his own writing as a starting point, abstracting his words into an alphabet of human scale using materials such as concrete, sand, steel, and tape. Other methods of directing meaning include a title or taking part in artists’ talks/interviews. To an extent, the artist can decide how they control the terms in which their work is framed and discussed. You may want to consider how the artwork operates without the apparatus involved in interpreting, critiquing and marketing it. It is not uncommon that more time is spent reading the interpretation of the work in a gallery than experiencing the work itself. Sometimes, it can feel as if the work and the text describing it are somewhat unrelated. If the discourses around the work are absent, how does this change the way you respond to a work?
It is also possible to go in the other direction and have no clear intention for the work. According to artist and teacher Graham Crowley there is a distinction between ‘ambiguity and vaguery’ (Crowley, 2009:129). Many artists deliberately avoid the possibility of fixing meaning in an explicit way, but at the same time maintain a specific identity for the work. The desire for the work to be open to different possible meanings is not the same as not knowing what you want for it. On the other hand, to not have thought about particular aspects of the work, or not to know whether something works in the way that you want it to, would constitute vagueness.
‘“Getting it right” or “finding it” is dependent upon a loss of control. I don’t want to be in control in those evolutionary beginnings to make something – I want to catch up with it – or catch it.’ (Wilding, 2004:82)
As you explored in part one, there is a balance to be struck between harnessing uncertainty during the creative process and at some time reaching for something not necessarily, certain, but close to what you want. It might not be easy to verbally articulate why something ‘feels right’, yet it will probably be the result of a process that comes from experience. This ability might be referred to as intuition, which can be derided as less valid than other types of ‘logical’ decision making processes, but intuition is not arbitrary or ungrounded but based in praxis. This involves following a path of inquiry, (some of which may be evident in the work) and having some awareness of what this is and how it could be perceived. This could be one of the differences between art and something that might look like art.
‘If I theorize about what is going on in my art, I do so after the making of it. As I think I’ve said before, An artist might become frightened by what he has done. He’s alone with the work and will seek reassurance from himself. Take the paintings that were shown at the Venice Biennale in 1966 – I guess you can call them window-shaped with a monochrome surface, but with drawing at the edge. I looked at them and I said, “Well it makes, I believe, perfect sense. Yes, the edge of the shape can be seen as a drawing, as line.” But when I did it I surely wasn’t thinking of that. I felt impelled to do it and to see what it would look like, and it pleased me.’ (Olitski, 2010:210)
Reflection
This final quote by Olitski resonates with me. Often when I am painting I also do it from a place of curiosity, simply wanting to see what it will look like. Every artist has a style, a type of technique or colour preference which is often a thread in their work. As mentioned above, this likely developed from repitition and practice and does not necessarily dictate or ask for meaning. I for one would hope that there are times when artists simply do something because they enjoy or like it.
reading point 3
Schneemann, C. (2018) ‘On intuition’ In: Boon, Levine (eds.) Practice, Documents of Contemporary Art. Cambridge: The MIT Press. pp. 213-214 (provided in resources)
Notes from On Intuition
- The writer comments on how our intuition can at times be over-written by reason. We curb our instinctive responses by allowing our environment, culture or considerations of others to impact them.
- When we can allow ourselves to block other factors and simply rely on instinct, we might be able to produce pieces that are truly our own. The writer does acknowledge that the intuition came from experimentation with her creative tools, thus showing that even though there were instinctive choices, they developed form prior experiences or ideas.
Ultimately it is in the gaps between the artwork/audience; artist/audience; artist/artwork that meaning is generated. A consideration that hasn’t been examined here, is the frame/institution and underlying apparatus of the production, distribution, and consumption of art and its impact on meaning. You will investigate this in part four.
Notes from On Intuition
- The writer comments on how our intuition can at times be over-written by reason. We curb our instinctive responses by allowing our environment, culture or considerations of others to impact them.
- When we can allow ourselves to block other factors and simply rely on instinct, we might be able to produce pieces that are truly our own. The writer does acknowledge that the intuition came from experimentation with her creative tools, thus showing that even though there were instinctive choices, they developed form prior experiences or ideas.
Ultimately it is in the gaps between the artwork/audience; artist/audience; artist/artwork that meaning is generated. A consideration that hasn’t been examined here, is the frame/institution and underlying apparatus of the production, distribution, and consumption of art and its impact on meaning. You will investigate this in part four.
further research
Leung, G. (2008) ‘Undecidability as Resistance: The Potential Space of Suspension. Notes on Art Sheffield 08’ In: Afterall.org 15/08.08 [online] At: https://www.afterall.org/online/undecidability.as.resistance.the.potential.space.of.suspension.notes.on.art.sheffield.08#.WzZLeIV2At0 (Accessed on 27.06.18)
In this article the artist explores the role of interpretation or finding meaning in art by looking at a few rather complex pieces that have elements of certainty which is referred to as determined and elements that may still be unanswered or undetermined.
Other note worthy points:
Let's take a closer look at two of the artists and works referred to and how they relate to the 2 points above.
In this article the artist explores the role of interpretation or finding meaning in art by looking at a few rather complex pieces that have elements of certainty which is referred to as determined and elements that may still be unanswered or undetermined.
Other note worthy points:
- Our reason and senses are in opposition. Our senses detect what is aesthetic and created immediate initial responses. While reason stems from rules or prior knowledge and helps us find meaning in what we see. Once could negate the other if our reactions are opposing.
- The viewer plays and important role in completing the creative process of the art work created as there interpretations of it extends the work itself.
Let's take a closer look at two of the artists and works referred to and how they relate to the 2 points above.
Julius Koller
He is a Czechoslovakian artist whose works are of great significance in questioning authority, tradition and art as a consumer product. He organised what he called Anti-happenings, where he wanted the viewer to become more aware of their surroundings. They were a statement about society and the political views of the time. He does this by using "simple symbols and then charges them with complex meanings by subjecting them to a process of continuous variation and transmutation" (Verwoert, 2003). Time/Space Definition of the Psychophysical Activity of Matter (1968) is an example of this, as the artists repetitevely drew or changed the lines of a tennis court. The court represents a type of deomcratic space where both players have the same set of rules and share this equally. It is a means to question the views of the political structures in Czechoslova at that time. |
Reflection
This piece certainly explores the boundaries of what we sense and experience. A viewer looking at the the photographic documentation of the pieces will definitly have a different experience from a viewer who was present. Our immediate senses would reconize the shape of a court and make associations of sport, taking us away from artistic considerations. However, when looking at an exhibition as a whole or collection of documentation whe would start to recognize the small changes in the depictions of the court and realize that there must be some form of symbolism or reason behind this. This will allow us to bring the work back to being a form of art, but only if we, the viewer, choose to find that meaning.
This piece certainly explores the boundaries of what we sense and experience. A viewer looking at the the photographic documentation of the pieces will definitly have a different experience from a viewer who was present. Our immediate senses would reconize the shape of a court and make associations of sport, taking us away from artistic considerations. However, when looking at an exhibition as a whole or collection of documentation whe would start to recognize the small changes in the depictions of the court and realize that there must be some form of symbolism or reason behind this. This will allow us to bring the work back to being a form of art, but only if we, the viewer, choose to find that meaning.
Ryszard Wasko
Wasko is a Polish artist who creates conceptual pieces that explore time, space and movement. He especially uses photography and film in his practical explorations as the have one foot in reality in the other in a temporal fourth dimension or constructed space (Elderton, 2014). His 1973 film Zaprzeczenie (Negation), is the repitition of the word 'nie' being typed and spoken on screen. At a certain point the words start being erased. The interpretations of the piece are not exactly clear. It may simply be an exploration of how we make connections between our sensces. Seing and hearing the word. However, the act of erasing the word while still saying may cause the viewer to question whether the the power in the meaning of the word is then lost. Interestingly, Westen countries interpreted the piece as a form of protest against communism (MUZEUM, 2004). This shows how a viewer's individual culrual context and understanding can create subjective interpretations. |
Reflection
This is once again another example of how our senses go to work first in perceiving the piece. We hear and see what is happening on screen. The repitition becomes rather boring after a while and as a viewer you (or me at least) start to loose interest. This first impression leads me to disregard the piece's aesthetic value. However, when the words start being erased an immediate new response is formed. The viewer now begins to question why the sound remains the same, but the words are being erased. The simple act of questioning is what incites interpretation and therefore brings back value to the piece.
Considering this, I would not agree that reason and senses work in opposition, but rather that the work together. Tha being said, they can only work together if the viewer chooses to find meaning. I have been to many museums and galleries where viewers simply look and don't question. My husband is a perfect example. If he does not like what he is looking at immediately, he will move on without any consideration and vice versa.
So what does this mean for the artist. I guess it means that you should certainly be considering both aestetics and meaning in your work as the two are more likely to funtion together than appart. It also means that you have to allow for the fact that viewers are subjective and be opn to the fact that they may not respond to your pieces as intended, but this simply means that the piece can become extended through their interpretations, which if you are not too precious about the orignal intent, can be an exciting thing.
This is once again another example of how our senses go to work first in perceiving the piece. We hear and see what is happening on screen. The repitition becomes rather boring after a while and as a viewer you (or me at least) start to loose interest. This first impression leads me to disregard the piece's aesthetic value. However, when the words start being erased an immediate new response is formed. The viewer now begins to question why the sound remains the same, but the words are being erased. The simple act of questioning is what incites interpretation and therefore brings back value to the piece.
Considering this, I would not agree that reason and senses work in opposition, but rather that the work together. Tha being said, they can only work together if the viewer chooses to find meaning. I have been to many museums and galleries where viewers simply look and don't question. My husband is a perfect example. If he does not like what he is looking at immediately, he will move on without any consideration and vice versa.
So what does this mean for the artist. I guess it means that you should certainly be considering both aestetics and meaning in your work as the two are more likely to funtion together than appart. It also means that you have to allow for the fact that viewers are subjective and be opn to the fact that they may not respond to your pieces as intended, but this simply means that the piece can become extended through their interpretations, which if you are not too precious about the orignal intent, can be an exciting thing.
Works Cited
Elderton, L. (2014) Ryszard Wasko [online] At: https://frieze.com/article/ryszard-wasko (Accessed on 20 January 2020)
MUZEUM (2004) Filmoteka Museum: Ryszard Waśko Negation. [online] At:https://artmuseum.pl/en/filmoteka/praca/wasko-ryszard-zaprzeczenie (Accessed on 20 January 2020)
Verwoert, J. (2003) Július Koller. [online] At: https://frieze.com/article/j%C3%BAlius-koller-0 (Accessed on 20 January 2020)
Elderton, L. (2014) Ryszard Wasko [online] At: https://frieze.com/article/ryszard-wasko (Accessed on 20 January 2020)
MUZEUM (2004) Filmoteka Museum: Ryszard Waśko Negation. [online] At:https://artmuseum.pl/en/filmoteka/praca/wasko-ryszard-zaprzeczenie (Accessed on 20 January 2020)
Verwoert, J. (2003) Július Koller. [online] At: https://frieze.com/article/j%C3%BAlius-koller-0 (Accessed on 20 January 2020)
assignment 2: understanding
‘But what of understanding, of being understood? Understanding what? Does it matter? Why should art be “understood” (and what does “understanding” mean in this context)?’ (Barlow, 2004:85)
Look through your notes and observations made during this part. Above is a quote from a conversation between the artists Phyllida Barlow and Alison Wilding. In your learning log (in 1000 words) discuss these questions in relation to yourself as an artist and then yourself as a viewer of art. Bring in the themes and discussions that you have explored in this part. Send all the work for Assignment two to your tutor.
*This assignment was sent as a separate PDF.
Look through your notes and observations made during this part. Above is a quote from a conversation between the artists Phyllida Barlow and Alison Wilding. In your learning log (in 1000 words) discuss these questions in relation to yourself as an artist and then yourself as a viewer of art. Bring in the themes and discussions that you have explored in this part. Send all the work for Assignment two to your tutor.
*This assignment was sent as a separate PDF.
reflecting on tutor feedback for part 2
The tutor remarked that there were many insightful and critical responses in my learning log which shows that I am engaging well with the theoretical elements of the course. They encourage me to consider how I can bring these theories into my own practice. Most of the feedback was focused on the written piece and the general sense was that the piece of writing did not have a clear focus. I used the remarks to rewrite the piece and submitted the work again. I did not receive an updated tutor report for this, but the tutor acknowledged that there was a more sustained focus in the new piece. Looking ahead to part 3, I will consider how I can better incorporate the theoretical ideas from the course into my work.