This week we studied the art of ceramics and its significance about it.  The speaker that talked about this topic was Professor Brian Gillis who works with ceramics as well as other medias.  I found his presentation interesting because he brought up the term of multiples and how it relates to ceramics.  The definition he presented for multiples was “a three-dimensional object that is intended to exist not as a unique work of art, but as an editioned original.” Basically, it’s when an art piece has additional editions or collections that is either exactly the same with minor changes, or there is a characteristic that relates it to previous pieces.  Before this presentation I never really thought about art in terms of multiples.  But this idea very broad and general that it's hard to determine what is a multiple.  Throughout the class Professor Gillis kept questioning if a certain art piece is an example of a multiple.  Some of the main comparisons he made were does it have to be an exact replica, or can it be something that just has the same shape?  Could it even be using an existing physical object and presenting it through a different media? Can it be as simple as making copies of the same thing? Or could I be using materials from the existing art to make other things?  All these questions were addressed during the presentation and it was thought these questions that made the topic very interesting.  For once, it wasn’t about the examples showed, but the questions that arose from the examples that made the presentation worthwhile.  It made me think though, multiples doesn’t only apply to ceramics.  I disliked the fact that the presentation defined ceramics as being a process of multiples because when you think about all medias use multiples.  In graphic design logos, posters, clothing, and print are being duplicated multiple times, isn’t this using multiples? It extends to fashion design, isn’t making more different sizes and color variations of the same item multiples? Isn’t mass production in general the idea of multiples? Even companies like Apple use multiples, hence the 5 generations of iPods.  It’s amazing that an art term like multiples can be applied to real life situations and makes it understandable.  This presentation instead of focusing on ceramics I came to understand how big the impact and importance of art is on our society.  We can use art to explain things in a way that affects people instantly.  Think about it, isn’t more interesting when there is a visual? It’s proven in lectures everyday, there is never a class where someone falls asleep to someone who is just talking.  To close things up the term of multiples defines how we spread the greatness of art.  It’s not about creating one extravagant piece, but creating an extravagant piece and being able to spread the importance of it to gain different perspectives. 

            The artist we studied this week was Gabriel Orozco who utilizes this term of multiples in his art.  Out of his many artworks I found the Supermarket photos the most powerful and intriguing.  The reason why I found it so powerful was because of its commonality.  The environment of the supermarket is one anyone can relate too.  So many things happen in this one area that no one really pays attention to the organization and strict protocol of a super market.  Orozco basically took notice of how organized the supermarket is and decided to do something we always wanted to do, mess it up.  Everyone has that urge in them sometime in their life where you just want to mess things up because its fun.  And to do it in place where everything has a specific place and location is just amazing! This relates to the topic of multiples because he used more than one of the same objects to display the work.  For example he moved five potatoes to the school supplies section by placing each potato on a folder.  This is a multiple because there are five similar objects, and the repetition of it completes the message of the art piece.  If there were only one of each object the affect would not be the same.

            Another artist we studied this week was Justin Novak who is well known for his ceramic figurines entitled “21^st Century Bunny.”  His sculpture was really powerful because not only did it have this urban street vibe, which I am most interested in, but it had this strong patriotic feel as well.  I had the idea that it almost challenged the problems in our government by using the red and blue colors.  Also the fact that it is an animal, it kind of fits in with the political party animals character and because its neither an elephant or donkey it suggests this creation of a separate party.  But, besides my idea of what I think the meaning is I still felt just appearance wise that the piece was successful.  It has this playful and cute look that it makes you want to own one right when you see it.  This relates to the term of multiples because he was able to create different editions of this one sculpture.  Just by changing the size and color gives it a whole different feel even though it's the same shape.  That is why the idea of multiples is so beneficial to art as well as society.  Not only are artists able to spread their work around the world, but continue their artwork for many years.

            The last artist we witnessed was JR and his TED wish.  I found this artist’s work the most moving and touching out of the entire artists we studied.  He took the idea of multiples to a whole new level.  He used the art of photography and used it to spread a message around the world.  Like I said before, multiples give artists the chance to spread their message around the world, just like JR.  By printing multiple pictures and varying them by size gave him the opportunity to present this powerful message through art.  After his first collection of photo installations he didn’t stop there, he took this idea and did another collection with a different message and photo subjects.  He used the art of multiples to portray a different chapter of his art.  He went from doing it in one town, then to multiple towns, to multiple countries, and now the whole world.  This shows how powerful art can be, it can change the world.  Even though it may be just posting pictures, the messages and stories behind the photos is what changes the world.  By giving people the opportunity to share their stories to others and have people learn about it, he is changing the world.  It may not be a drastic change, but he is slowly inspiring people to open up and not be afraid to share their thoughts.  The world consists of people, and when you are able to inspire people, you are changing the world one person at a time.

            After this week the first thing I could think of was Bearbrick.  Bearbrick is a designer toy brand that utilizes the term of multiples.  All there toys have the same shape but are painted differently.  Every month they have a different collection that has a theme to the design of the multiple Bearbricks.  For example a Star Wars Collection, Skittles, Spongebob, and many more.  Even though it's the same shape, the changes in design make each collection entirely different from the rest.

            This week we talked about sculptures in contemporary art and how it has evolved over the years.  The speaker this week was Professor Amanda Wojick who specializes in sculpture here at the University of Oregon.  I felt that overall her presentation was the most prepared and knowledgeable compared to all the ones we’ve had this year.  Even though it wasn’t the most interesting to me I felt she did a great job in presenting 100 years of sculpture in an hour-long time slot.  One downfall about the presentation was that she only focused on female sculpture artist.  I felt that she should have mixed both male and female artists instead of just focusing on one.  But, I still was able to learn a lot about this kind of art.  One important point she made was making a distinction between abstraction and representation.  When viewing a sculpture it helps to determine whether the piece is abstract or representational, or even both.  Being able to distinguish that and then being able to make the connection to the opposite is when the meaning of the piece becomes evident.  For example the artist, Rachel Whiteread who takes all negative space and makes them into a positive existent space uses abstraction in her work.  Even though physically her work is abstract, when you look at it carefully it becomes representational in the sense that her sculpture is based off of a house.  By making this connection the meaning of her piece is shown, which is making the space that is unrealized most of the time visible to the eye.  Another artist I found interesting in her presentation was Tara Donovan.  I liked her work because she took sculpture to another level by combining it with using the art of light and illumination.  She uses simple plastics cups and stacks them to make a topographic landscape, then illuminates them by light.  I create this beautiful mesmerizing scene that eases the eye.  Both these artists have those abstract and representational aspects in their work, which makes them great artists.

            Another artist we studied this week was Louis Bourgeois who was the first woman sculptor in Professor Wojick’s presentation.  Personally I found her work not as interesting to me as the other artist’s I mentioned before, but she is a trendsetter when it comes to sculpture so I greatly respect her.  Her work set the bar for sculpture because she has been working in this field a long time.  Her work really plays off of making something really abstract in order to represent a certain issue.  Her piece Black Hands is so abstract but it represents such a huge issue in our society.  She says it herself in the interview that her piece is so simple and no one will understand unless you really pay attention to it.  She also says how the hands are one with the stone and how she focused the piece on vandalism, which is why she put it out in the open.

            The second artist we studied this week was Richard Serra, and his approach to sculpture is the total opposite to what we have been looking at in class.  His work is the epitome of abstract.  His work compared to Bourgeois is on a much more simpler stage but yet has the same amount of meaning.   In his pieced entitled Torqued Eclipse, the sculpture at first glance looks like a large piece of metal.  But when I started to observe the whole object and it’s details I found myself not being able to look away.  Something about it made me keep staring and wondering why and how this piece was produced. I was only limited to one side of the sculpture I really wish I could walk around the whole piece because if I had the chance I think I would be walking around it many times.  I found what he said about the piece really inspiring and open a brand new perspective to art.  He said, “You don't want the kind of 'wow' effect. Basically, what you really want to do is try to engage the viewer's body relation to his thinking and walking and looking, without being overly heavy-handed about it.”  Hearing this made me think that sometimes the simplest form of things can be the most powerful and meaningful.  Even though it relates to the cliché “the simplest things in life are the best,” it’s really hard to actually do it physically.

            All these artists that we have studied relate a lot to the reading assigned this week.  I thought the reading not only was interesting and put a lot of thought into my mind but it close a lot of open ends.  For example, how he challenges the statement “I’m just looking” really made me stop and really think about what it actually means.  Because he is right, we are not just looking, the products and ourselves are simultaneously “hunting” each other.  We are not just looking but deeply thinking and critically observing objects.  If we were just looking, the employee would not approach you making you give that answer.  This reading basically summed up how sculptures are viewed.  It’s when we are able to forget that we are “looking” and rather observe and find a connection with the art.   When that connection is made it should feel like nothing is around and its only you and the sculpture.  He also talked about how it should be someone’s goal to gain something when viewing and object.  Whether it could be a picture or sculpture a person should be able to feel an emotion or mood that will stick with them forever.  I feel like this reading answers the question we have been trying to figure out the whole term, how do we view contemporary art.  Through this reading it’s basically just looking, and finding that connection.  The more we engage with a piece the more perspectives and views start to become evident.  No two people will have the same reaction towards a piece, but that one person can take time to think about the different views.  It’s not about finding a meaning to a piece and leaving, but it’s more about being “flexible” and taking it ten steps further.  Those ten steps further are looking for other meanings that haven’t been made.  Knowing this really connects the dots when thinking about all the presentations and contemporary art we have looked at.

            After this week one thing that comes to mind is this new sculpture that was installed in my hometown Hilo, Hawai’i.  This piece is in front of the new courthouse/county building.  I swear I must have spent a good 4 hours just staring at this piece because its so abstract but I know it represents something really big.  It’s not as simple as Serra, but still not like Bourgeois it’s like in the middle.  I made this connection because now when I go home instead of trying to think of one meaning I will try to view it on a different perspective.  Also, I won’t throw away any of my ideas, because my wrong could be someone’s right.

            This week we learned about crafts and other methods of production in art.  The guest speaker, Professor Anya Kivarkis gave a unique presentation in comparison to others we’ve had in the past.  One thing I learned from her presentation was that this type of art could either be an original or be a reproduction of the original.  I found this interesting because it reminded me of a reading I did for ARTD 251, Time Based Digital Art.  The reading was about copyright and how it's a problematic issue in the world of art.  The questions asked in the reading were, how much is copyright enforced in art, and how do we determine if an art piece is original or not.  The example used, was Duchamp’s installation of the urinal.  Is it art, or is it a copyright issue?  In my opinion there shouldn’t be boundaries to what artists can use to express themselves.  It’s more about the thought and creativity behind the piece rather than the physical appearance.  Duchamp deserves all the credit because he was the one that thought of displaying a urinal as an art piece.  For him to make that connection and think about something no one else would imagine is really commendable.  This relates to Robert Gober who did the sink installation we saw in the professor’s slideshow.  Another artist I found interesting in the slideshow was Gijs Bakker art entitled “Real Series.”  This collection was interesting because she used cheap flashy costume jewelry and attached a smaller reproduction of the jewelry piece but used real gemstones.  I found this really creative and cool because she turned the cheap costume jewelry into an elegant expensive piece just by attaching a smaller duplicate.  The last artist I found very intriguing was Allen McCollum, who did installations by re-producing an object over 1,000 times.  I just felt that the work and dedication to make the same object more than 1,000 times is amazing and crazy.  But, the results are worth it because it created this mind-blowing visual that is one of a kind.

            The second artist we studied this week was John Feodorv who is also a production artist as well as a painter/drawer.  While viewing his work I felt his work was really unique and really knows how to reproduction in his art.  One installation I found interesting was “Ambiguity,” because it gave off this playful yet creepy feel the more you looked at it.  The installation contained unstuffed toy animals lying on the ground with a large teddy bear made out of only cotton filling floating over the toys.  At first I thought, how cute it's a big bear, but then I realized that the stuffing came from the animals lying on the floor.  This relates to the presentation because he is using a common object such as a stuff animal and constructing them in a way that is visually intriguing.  Another was where he used the doctor board game to make an art piece.  It’s intriguing because there is connection between it being a fun game as well as becoming a real life surgery situation.

            After this week’s lesson one thing that came to mind was the bat installation at the Seattle Mariner’s baseball park, Safeco Field.  The piece is entitled “The Tempest,” where the artists, Linda Beaumont, Stuart Keeler and Michael Machnic used 1,000 baseball bats they reproduced to create this beautiful piece.  The piece is placed on the ceiling in the main entrance of the stadium.  Not only is it beautiful to look at, it also lights up at night illuminating through the translucent bats.  This relates to this week because they reproduced the baseball bat in order to create the art piece.

            

            This week’s speaker Carla Bengston made some interesting points about the relationship between nature and arts.  One thing I found interesting was how an artist’s medium can enhance an art piece’s value and make it more intriguing.  I also thought it was interesting how artist’s are becoming more innovative with the use of nature and using almost every aspect of it to create art pieces.  Whether its dirt, sticks, tree trunks, minerals, plants, flowers, or even being inspired by nature.  Knowing an art piece has a connection with nature makes it so much more meaningful because it has an origin.  Basically what I’m trying to say is that someone can look at nature and be reminded of a certain art piece.  Also it can intrigue more viewers to look at an art piece when they are able to recognize such common figures we see everyday.  She also made an important point about how artists are using the earth rather than removing it entirely.

The reading for this week to me was very complicated and hard to understand.  But I also had fun with it because it’s the epitome of what this class is all about.  Instead of viewing it as a reading I viewed as a contemporary art piece and trying to find the meaning to why this piece was created.  This process is what we are striving to be able to do with contemporary art.  Not only did this reading have its own message but also as a whole it meant a lot to what this class is really about.  My first thoughts after finishing the reading, were blank, the vocabulary and structure of it blew my mind.  But, the sentences that I could understand made the meaning seem so much clearer.  On thing I got out of the reading was that the death of the author is an aspect in art and literature that cannot be prevented.  Just like life, everyone has a point in life when his or her time ends and moves on to a better place.  In order for new ideas, or message to be spread the death of the author is necessary for this process to keep on going.  But, this doesn’t mean we completely forget who the author is, but sometimes it takes one to bring back the author and recognize them for their work.  Also I learned that literature, when read by the public the author’s intended message would always be interpreted differently no matter what.  Everyone has his or her own perspectives and views that it’s hard for a message to be comprehended by everyone.  Just like contemporary art, every single viewer will have a different thought or idea of what the meaning of the piece is.  Even though the artist has their own intended meaning and inspiration it doesn’t mean that all will understand that message.  In order for an artist to show their work it comes with a cost and that is themselves.  Once their art is displayed to viewers opinions are unlimited and the amount of interpretations sky rocket.  Probably only 1 out of 10 viewers will interpret it the same way as the artist, but the rest are free to view it anyway they want.

Another artist we studied this week was Kiki Smith, who does sculpture installations.  Her work is very strong and powerful because she used the human body.  In her first couple installations she uses here own facial features to create these full body sculptures in order to portray a message.  She makes that connection with nature because she never makes a new sculpture.  When watching her video I found it interesting how she reuses her sculptures and just makes adjustments to them.  Her work has this uncomfortable and bone chilling feels because of the expressions on these sculptures. One work I found very powerful was the witchcraft installation.  In this installation she has three women sculptures on top of a pile of wood representing a fire.  This work had such a strong feel because it portrayed the controversy and harsh death these “witches” had to endure.  Also she explained how she formed their body to resemble Christ because they both were killed unwillingly.  Lastly I really enjoyed here animal piece because of the craftsmanship and tedious detail she put in those sculptures.

The movie we watched in class, I found it very hard to understand just like the reading.  But I found it interesting because he established himself as an artist that draws and nothing else.  And he was able to expand his talents and merge it with the art of opera.  Its fantastic how he was able to take one skill of drawing and connect it with different art forms to create these inspiring and one of a kind pieces.  Other works he created were using animated film, sculpture, optical illusions, and even performances.  Also his pieces focused on very strong issues dealing with politics and putting them in a very poetic and calming presentation.  On of the works I liked was where he did a time lapse of his works and the drawings felt like they had a mind of its own.  Also with the trance like music in the background created by the artist him self is also very interesting. 

When looking back at this week, it was one of the most complicated and hardest concepts to grasp.  Honestly, my mind is all over that place with these artists but one thing that came to mind was the Korean Memorial in Washington D.C.  I thought of this memorial because we were discussing how art and nature are being used together to create an installation.  Also, it relates to the reading because the sculptor and artist who created this memorial are the only ones who can fully explain the piece.  The thousands of people that view this memorial probably only see it as figures standing in a grass area, and it takes a pedestal with words to fully explain the piece.

            

         This week we also discussed Digital Arts, but taking on the more interactive design aspect.  Professor John Park had one of the best presentations so far because not only did it offer interesting art pieces, but he also had factual reasons that presented his view on art.  He opened up his presentation by introducing art being “in the state of being technologized.”  I found this one statement interesting because it made me think that even though our society may be thriving in technological developments, this is only the beginning.  Imagine twenty years from now how much technology will grow.  He later began to explain the pros and cons of technology, which I thought was a great way to give background on the field he works in.  He broke it down into three problems: the screen, money/profits, and human dehumanization.  In order to solve the screen problem where art is only something to look at there is the interactive side to art.  Using technology to create interactive art pieces where it responds to human action.  The second problem he presented was money, where art becomes about he commerce and sales.  The way is solves this problem is through street art.   Being able to express ones opinions through art in an open area that no can own or purchase.  Lastly how technology is changing the social habits of our society.  All these points made me think about how our society is becoming dependent on technology.  But for art, it's a whole new world that opens up so many possibilities to express an artist’s opinion.  It made me think about, is digital arts limitless? With painting and drawing you are limited to the space provided, but with digital arts it seems that anything is possible.  For example he showed us the Eyewriter device where a person can draw with the slight movements of their own eyeball and project it on a skyscraper.  With the advances in technology a photograph can be turned into a three dimensional world, a painting can become an animation, and lifestyles can be regenerated.  The possibilities are endless with digital art and it makes me excited to enter this world of endless possibilities.

            When he mentioned the problem of being limited to only the screen, it relates to the artist we also studied this week, David Byrne.  His piece entitles “Playing the Building,” took me by surprise.  As I watched the videos I couldn’t grasp the purpose or meaning of the piece.  I understood the obvious that by playing the piano it created noises to be projected from the building itself.  But then it hit me, was so much more than playing the music.  It’s that feeling of being able to control such a large space in the tips of your fingers.  Many of the people playing the piano could no figure out where these sounds were coming from.  It took the art of sound out of the speaker and combines it with art to create an interactive installation.  Brynes is going against this era where music is all about using digitally enhanced effects and tunes to create a song.  Instead he uses technology to make music through physical objects, in this case a building.  It made me think about when it was fun to hit pots and pans with spoons when you a kid.  It’s almost like he recreated this feeling but a bigger and more advanced scale.

            The second artist we looked at this week was Paul Pfeiffer, who specializes in installations and video editing.  We looked at two of his pieces one being the installation of the Amityville horror house, and the second the digitally erased videos.  Personally I found the installation not as powerful as the digitally erased videos.  I thought the idea was genius in the installation, but I couldn't fully understand the meaning behind it.  What I thought about the meaning was it gave a view of different perspectives, thus giving the viewer the chance to experience both characters in the story by just looking in a small hole.  But, I found the digitally enhanced photos much more intriguing, I guess because it’s so tedious.  The concept of taking out aspects of a video and photo and leaving certain objects gives off this weird feeling.  When I watched the Stanley cup video where he edited out the players carrying the trophy leaving it to float around the ice by itself.  At first I thought it was cool but then I started feeling uncomfortable.  It gave off this feel where like in the movies everything around the main character disappears and they are left in this silent, empty environment.  But, the most important part about his work is how he says when doing his work to others it seems crazy and ridiculous, but to him its like meditation.  It’s inspiring to see someone’s passion so deep that it motivates me to become a better artist.

            The last artist we looked at was Janet Cardiff who specializes in creating interactive art pieces through the use of sound.  What’s cool about this artist is she takes it beyond to just listening, she makes the viewer move around and physically walk through the sound. She calls these pieces “walks” where viewers are able to walk in a space and hear the progression of sound relating to the surroundings.  Her work really made me think about, could this be the next best thing to 3d movies? What if artists could walk in environments and listen to sound that creates the feel like movies do?  This kind of relates to Blasts Theory’s online interactive game Can You See Me Now.  Where two people are experiencing this adrenaline rush of a huge game of hide and seek, but one person is just sitting at a computer screen while the other is physically running around.  The usage of technology to have art reach out of the screen or sound reach out of the speaker to physically interact with a viewer is astonishing.  It makes me think, what are the possibilities to digital art evolving some more.  Already it has proved to be limitless, now all that's left is to ask what’s next?

            After hearing and learning about all these artists it made me think about one thing, the happiest place on earth Disneyland.  When you think about it Disneyland thrives on digital art and installations.  Cardiff’s sound walks are almost like all the rides at Disneyland.  There is sound progressing as people go through the ride, and there are different emotions being felt throughout the ride.  One ride that specifically came to mind was the California Adventure ride, I think its called Soaring Over California.  Basically it's a ride where it simulates a person on a hand glider flying over California.  I thought about this ride because it uses every aspect of Digital Arts.  The film of the many landscapes and cities are edited through digital media as well as syncing the “glider” to interact with the video.   Without technology and Digital Arts the feeling of being able to experience a feeling without actually doing it could never be done.

Soaring Over California Ride

            In this weeks class we learned about the art form of digital photography from professor Craig Hickman.  Before going into this I viewed digital photography as photos being printed from a digital camera.  I never thought that by putting in text and editing photos would still be considered digital photography.  When I hear the word photography I think of the raw print and seeing the photo not go through editing.  But now, I see it as an art when artists add elements to the photo.  During professor Hickman’s presentation I was honestly very confused and lost.  By seeing how the past few presentations went his was very different.  I was expecting him to explain his artist life, and then show a couple of his own work but instead he showed us work that he admired.  By showing the work of other photographers I felt a little disappointed because I wanted to see what he does and how he views the art of digital photography.  As the presentation went on some of the photographers work caught my eye but others were kind of boring.  The works that caught my eye was by Joseph Holmes, and Caleb Charland.

            I admired Joseph Holmes’s work because it captured the everyday life.  For me I think the purpose of photos is to capture moments in life that are worth remembering or makes a statement.  What I mean by makes a statement, is the photo has meaning, or an emotion being emitted from the photo. If a person who views that photo and can sense what the subject is feeling then that's a photograph.  In Holmes’s work he captures the life of hardworking average people in places who’s existence is rarely noticed.  His photo entitled NYC Xmas Tree Vendors is physically very simple, but yet so powerful.  All the photos capture a wide range of emotions. Some looked unsatisfied with what they were doing, while some looked happy and content with their job.  I thought it was really interesting how the photos were taken in a busy city like NYC but the made me think about the joy and happiness during Christmas time.  In each photo it made me think about how the simple things in life are sometimes the most important.  Without a Christmas tree, Christmas is not the same for me, I can’t imagine going home seeing no tree.  That's why I enjoyed this collection of photographs because it captured people who wouldn’t necessarily be noticed for being a powerful figure in society.

NYC Xmas Photo.

            I admired Caleb Charland’s work because not only are they really cool, but it made me think and ask a whole lot of questions.  His work captured light in ways I didn’t even know could be done.  From the very first picture I was asking How did he do that, what kind of camera did he use, where are the people, how is the light there on its own, and many more.  His photos don’t capture human emotions like Holmes but it had the same effect when viewing his work.  There wasn't one specific photo I liked because all of them were really captivating and kept me staring at it for a very long time.  I thought that his work symbolized the everyday skill of asking questions, kind of making the imaginable into something real.  Also his work uses things that people look past and don’t notice as something that can contribute to art.  It just proves that everything and anything is a form of art.

Charland's piece done with a cigarette lighter. AMAZING!

            Another artist we studied this week was Alfredo Jaar.  Jaar does installation pieces that use photography.   When viewing his pieces its obvious that he doesn’t just show the pictures as is, but he makes them into physical art pieces that the viewer can interact with.  Not only is he showing the image but also he is giving the viewer the opportunity to be in the photo and feel the emotion first hand.  In his piece entitled Let One Hundred Flowers Bloom I felt the emotions he was trying to portray.  The connection he made between the flowers placed on a graveyard and our society is just incredible.  I think he really succeeded in showing the different struggles people around the world are going through.  By using a graveyard setting, which is already powerful it and then adding the different effects affecting the flowers completed the emotion.  His work takes the photograph one step further by making it into a physical environment.

Let One Hundred Flowers Bloom by Alfredo Jaar

            Lastly, when viewing articles concerning manipulated photos and its credibility I think it brought up a really interesting point.  Are photos as real as they seem to be?  People are accustomed to believing a photograph because it's a physical object capturing still images of life.  But now with the software to edit photos, it is rare to see images in their raw state.  In the article talking about the photo of the missiles being fired, to me it looked real until I read it was fake.  It astounds me how much power this photo had, all major news companies printed this photo as being legit.  Personally I found it amusing because who ever manipulated the photo really succeeded because this person cause a worldwide commotion.  And this connects to the Dove commercial where they showed the process of retouching and how it can change a person so drastically.  Watching it at first, I thought, wow this is really interesting but then I thought about it more and it made me sad.  The reason why I was sad was that because of all these retouching and manipulating news surfacing what if the credibility of photos starts to decrease? If people start questioning photos the true meaning of photography get lost.  But yet another side of me thinks that it's an art form when manipulating photos to make people think a certain way.  It proves the power of a photograph and the capabilities it has.

            When viewing all these artists I thought about this image I manipulated two years ago.  It was during the summer before I came to college and half of my friends already left for college.  With my friends who were still home, we went to the beach and took a picture of all us together.  I later posted the picture on Facebook and one of my friends who was in college says put me in that photo, I was like ok sure.  So I photoshopped him in and then later posted it and then everyone was so confused because they thought he left.  I don't know, it's a corny story but reading how photos are so powerful and have such a high credibility this story came into my head because I experienced it first hand.  Knowing it’s not the real picture but everyone is convinced it is is really an amusing feeling. 

This was the manipulated photo. I won't say who isn't supposed to be there, but I'm sure you can guess.

             This week we discussed the art style of Fibers, which really took me by surprise how innovative and unique the art is.  Before the lecture I only thought of fibers as producing fabrics and sewing quilts.  At the beginning when Professor Sarah was talking I was able to grasp the idea of what Fibers art is and understand how this type of art is so famous.  I thought her presentation was very intriguing because I never really took attention to this kind of art before.  For example in the first few slides of the presentation I was amazed about how something so tiny can produce these huge sculptures.  It made me think about how fiber art is almost like the art of human life.  What I’m trying to say is that all these piece of fiber are being put together to create this innovative and interesting art pieces.  Just like how societies should strive to be, coming together to be a strong and happy community.  Next she showed the art pieces of Claire Zeisler, and I thought she was genius.  Her use of fibers made me also think about how great our society is when people work together.  In the piece where it has these long pieces of bounded threads twisted carefully hanging from the ceiling and being untwined on the bottom.  

Claire Zeisler's piece.

At first glance it gave off like a samurai, Japanese royalty feel because of the bright red threads and use of wavy lines.  But, more importantly I saw it also symbolizing a happy life.  I interpreted it, as when people come together it’s strong and can be something big, but when separated the binds come lose and it's a big chaos.  Just like the piece, everything is so neat and precise where the threads are together, but at the end they all just come apart.  From then one I viewed fiber art as an art form that can project a stronger message because of its limitless possibilities.  Fiber art can be all kinds of dimensions giving it the opportunity to not only mentally, but also physically send a message across.  For example, Cat Mazzas Nike blanket, I found that piece not only visually appealing but also the message behind it made it even stronger.  It was able to not only project the message visually, but when you look closer there is another story told in each of those 4-inch patches.  It’s intriguing to me the depth of fiber art.  It doesn’t stop at the surface, you figure out the meaning the more you into it and the smaller details.

            My personal favorite, was Cat Mazzas, besides her Nike blanket (PICTURE), 

her other knit pieces are phenomenal.  I just found how she incorporated the skills and techniques of knitting into digital art.  I find that a very creative and innovative combination that nobody would expect.  In her animation she uses a lot of details that look like stitching.  I find that very fresh and new that it puts a whole other side to what fiber art can be.  The piece entitled Kintoscope Testimonies, where she interviewed people working within the labor union, but there faces were consisted of only these small x’s that resembled a (PICTURES) stitch.  

Not only was it amazing how they were able to use only these x’s to create recognizable human faces.  But, I was also amazed as how eye catching and urban it looked.  Taking this very old-fashioned feel of knitting and reinventing it to give of a modern, hip look.  She really redefined what fiber art is and can be.

            Besides the presentation we also looked at two more artists, Ann Hamilton and Cai Guo-Qiang.  I really enjoyed Cai Guo-Qiang’s work not only because it was eye-catching but also the messages he was able to portray visually.  He took installation and fiber art to whole other level.  When looking at his work it took me awhile to figure out how his art is related to fibers.  Then it hit me, fibers don’t always have to be thread or clothe.  Fiber art is taking any physical thing and putting them together in a way to create an art piece.   It could be gunpowder like Qiang does in his drawings or even everyday supplies that were put together to make a huge airplane.  His work really made me understand what fiber art has to offer.  Like what Sarah said, these pieces are made to explore personal stories.  Which makes sense to why they are so successful, these textiles are able to touch someone emotionally at a global perspective.  The message is not as clear as iconography, but the more you engage into the more it starts to make sense and wow min

This weeks focus on iconography really caught my interest because its one of my biggest influences when it comes to doing art.  Professor Michael Salter’s presentation caught my attention from the very beginning.  His opening slide with just his name and iconic character was very intriguing to me.  Just the color contrast and flatness of the slide was really eye catching.  In the beginning when he was talking about his life before becoming a professor he mentioned about how he was “overly observant.”  I found this interesting because it made me realize that its ok to question every little thing and wonder how something is made, why it looks that way, what does it stand for.  Every little detail matters and maybe that one image can trigger a great idea.  Another thing he mentioned was to “surround yourself with stuff you love.”  By looking at his work I was able to tell without knowing, he’s into street art, the surfing lifestyle, urban lifestyle, and simple ideas.  And come to find out he’s a surfer and is the only professor wearing the sickest pair of Adidas kicks instead of loafers.  It inspired me to do art not only to please others but also to please my self and do pieces that I feel happy about.  An artist’s surroundings become their greatest inspirations and motivations to produce great work.

Seeing Professor Michael's work I thought of these pair of shoes by Jeremy Scott for Adidas because it plays off of the common wish of being able to fly.  Just like many of Professor Michael's pieces he takes ideas people think about and presents it visually.  Also i thought of this because he mentioned he's into kicks and was wearing a tight pair of kicks during the lecture

In the latter part of his presentation when he began showing his work I was literally going crazy.  His style of art is what I live for and admire.  It is flat, high color contrasts, street/urban feel, playful, fun, and clean.  His work made a statement and showed images that are only thought about.  He takes funny jokes and thoughts and makes them a visual piece.  I also love his work because it never gets old.  For some reason I could look at his work everyday till the day I die and still admire it.  My favorite image was the boy with the extremely large Popsicle in his mouth.  I like this image the best because it had so much emotion and questions to ask that I couldn’t stop looking at it.  It had this combination of Asian pop culture mixed with the clothing style of Billionaire Boys Club.  I was amazed on something so simple can convey so much thought and emotions, that it got me thinking he could put any type of food in the mouth and it would be a whole different piece.

This is the logo for Billionaire Boys Club, a popular urban streetwear brand.  Viewing Michael Salter's work made me think of their logo and style of clothes they produce.

Another artist studied this week was Chris Coleman.  His work really spoke to me because of the issues he tackles through his art.  For example sculpture entitled “Informational Divides” took on the complicated and current issue of race.  Nobody really pays attention to race and how it sets divisions in our society.  I really like how he layered the piece by having the people first and then going to the emotions, land, and ending with government.  It told the story perfectly, shows what’s happening physically, then the emotions felt, how it affects are land, and where the problem all started.  This piece is not only visually intriguing but content wise as well.  His style also has this simple yet detailed look to it that makes it even easier to look at.

While watching his work I somehow thought about an artist that goes by the name of Buff Monster.  Somehow the flat style and usage of color made me think of this artist.  Buff Monster uses a lot of iconography in his works and is really famous for it.  He uses strong outlines with solid colors that contrast with each other, and creates unique characters that capture the eye.  Take a look at video taken at one of his shows.

BUFF MONSTER VIDEO

Both these artists have one thing in common; they use iconography in some way or another in their art.  This weeks reading was all about iconography, how its developed and why it’s so popular in pop culture.  In the beginning I thought it was really cool how it showed the stages leading to an image becoming an iconographic piece.  I was really able to grasp what a true iconographic image is.  I learned that it’s about capturing the important points of an object and flaunting those to capture the essence of it.  This article made a point as well, our society lives of iconography.  Whether its business logos, bathroom signs, street signs, personal messages, and even languages are all icons.  The big part of this reading was about how iconography shapes the comic world.  Before reading this article I never thought of comics being iconographic images.  But now I realize that the reason why comics are so popular is because the art used is so generalized to the point where everyone can relate to the characters portrayed.  I also liked how he mentioned manga pushing the boundaries even farther when it comes to comic art.  Their characters are not only iconographic but started a culture, which proves that cartoons and iconography has a big part in the culture of our society.  Without it there would be no Mickey Mouse, Spiderman, Toy Story, or even the basic four stroke happy face.  Iconography has shaped our society and will continue too for many years to come.

After i finished my blog entry i went to my closet to find this shirt, and it kind of reminded me of everything we viewed and read about this week.  If i were to view each icon separately they each would have their own story and meaning no matter how simple it is.   Iconography is great because its so basic yet makes me think and look at it for much longer than a normal painting.

WEEK ONE

            I thought that this week’s guest speaker, Laura Vandenburgh had a great message and point to her presentation on drawing.  Many people think of drawing as a pencil to paper kind of thing but she showed how drawing could be pushed to another level.  Drawing doesn’t have to be this realistic masterpiece but it can be as simple as a doodle on a test paper during class.  Even though all the slides shown were different pieces of art, they were still considered drawings.  I could really relate to what she was presenting because I think there is no definition to what is art.  If the artist considers their piece to be a drawing then that's their point of view and the viewer can either agree or disagree.  That's the great thing about art, it’s so broad that many point of views can be established and create fresh, eye opening, mind questioning pieces.  When you think about it, everything in the world is a piece of art.

            One of my favorite pieces from the slideshow Laura presented was where it was in a gallery and it showed two walls with simple black curved lines covering the entire wall.  I really liked this piece because of its simplicity and how the place of the lines created a sophisticated and expensive vibe.  It made me think, “I could have done that,” and I really love those kinds of art pieces because it proves that anything can be art.

            Another artist we studied this week was Margaret Kilgallen who was a famous for her hand painted masterpieces on big surfaces.  I really enjoyed her work because although she drew people and other physical objects, she made it her own.  When you see her paintings you know it was done by her because it had a certain look and characteristics that were special to her.  I really admire her for that because it’s really hard for an artist to develop his or her own style that can be recognized right off the back.  Another reason why I like this artist is because she is a street artist.  Street art is one of my biggest influences and inspirations because it has a sense of freshness I don’t get from other art.  Viewing her work it has a nostalgic and playful vibe that when I look at it, fond childhood memories come to mind.  Also her technique is very clean and precise which makes it look even more intriguing and eye-catching.  Lastly, I admired the use of color in all her of her pieces.  She chose colors that create this common vibe and if you were able to put all her pieces next to each other, although they may be different they are all similar in a sense.

            One of my favorite pieces from her was the painting she did at UCLA.  I really liked this piece because of how clean it looked and the inspiration behind it.  Viewing the piece gave a nostalgic feel and made me wish that all business signs were hand painted again.  It showed that not all the time is neon signs and high tech stuff is better than simple hand painted ones.  She has this way to make you appreciate the past in your life and use it to better yourself in present day.  That is how I felt while looking at her work.

            Both these artists relate to the reading this week because they were successful in pushing the boundaries of art.  The reading for this week basically gave examples of modern art and how it was established.  Personally I love modern art because it’s more open and accepting to what is art.  Before the modern art movement it was all about technique and realism, which I don't really care for.  When an artist can take something and interpret it visually in their own way is admirable.  I think that it’s ingenious when artist’s like Duchamp take a toilet and turn it into a piece of art.  Who cares if he didn’t physically make the toilet, he was able to view the toilet as a piece of art and share his idea to the public.   This reading also made me realize that if there is a meaning and point of view from the artist in his/her piece then it’s art.  It doesn't have to be a classic Renaissance masterpiece or a Michelangelo sculpture; art is so broad that almost everything in life is art.  Humans are a work of art, technology, food, fashion, math equations, and buildings are all considered art. 

This is a sculpture done by the artist Takashi Murakami.  The reason why I though of him through this week is because his work has a style that is easily recognizable and he takes objects in life and recreates them to make it his own.  Also his work has been shown in classic art exhibitions where his style wouldn't be viewed as art in the past, but now he is one of the most famous artists of our time.  His visions and creativity always are mind blowing to me and I can never stop staring at his work.