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.