Friday, February 16, 2007
2/2/07 readings
The difficulties of being an artist: this essay is tiered and dreary, although within the scope of reality. It is a dreary drink of realism without hope. It equities illuminates the struggles of students without any hope for change. Is it artist vocation to struggle and then tot graduate school to teach? Boy, on the eve of my final semester with no desire to teach what does that mean for me? Shall, I just starve then… that must be my lot.
Art & Fear: “Artists, it turns out, area crafty lot and surprisingly adept at getting the system to foot the bill for letting them do exactly what they wanted to do anyways. This is a far cry from the difficulties of being an artist. To do what you want to do you must be able to convince the patron that you alone know the right way to make the piece.” Art is a self-imposed discipline. “The arts network is there to handle all those details not central to the art making process.” In the discussion of teaching…”one way or another you have to preserve time both for making art and for sharing that art making process with your students”… Go back to apprenticeship where one could learn all they needed by living it and seeing the artist in action. This is an ideal but not without it’s own problems, propaganda, dictation…”Art and Money are very much alike, in both embodiment and conception. To put it simply: Art and $ are cultural fictions with no intrinsic value.” Really this is funny it is so true. It’s a commodity autographed by an individual that has indefinable value.
Art & Fear: “Artists, it turns out, area crafty lot and surprisingly adept at getting the system to foot the bill for letting them do exactly what they wanted to do anyways. This is a far cry from the difficulties of being an artist. To do what you want to do you must be able to convince the patron that you alone know the right way to make the piece.” Art is a self-imposed discipline. “The arts network is there to handle all those details not central to the art making process.” In the discussion of teaching…”one way or another you have to preserve time both for making art and for sharing that art making process with your students”… Go back to apprenticeship where one could learn all they needed by living it and seeing the artist in action. This is an ideal but not without it’s own problems, propaganda, dictation…”Art and Money are very much alike, in both embodiment and conception. To put it simply: Art and $ are cultural fictions with no intrinsic value.” Really this is funny it is so true. It’s a commodity autographed by an individual that has indefinable value.
To sell your artwork is it unproductive labor, is it useful to society?! Socialist ideas is driven out of social needs, it is the care of all individuals yet art is not valuable within this system or ideal. How is art valued? Is it through the concept? Socialist value is found within labor driven needs, it is functional. Is art not valuable since it is not necessarily functional? Does every human function have to be productive? Does conceptual ideals have any social value? According to Marx everything that is not functional is invaluable, when Marx wrote his piece it was a different time, a different structure. In the 1800’s it was a utopic ideal. Yet one might say that artist are elevated above mundane jobs, is this cultivated through the value of one’s education. Artists are expressive, and create work that evokes an emotional response; it cultivates communication that is a lost art. Artists express ideals, which my subvert cultural ideas, it may challenge what is accepted, spark individual thoughts. What is your ideal of value, how is intellectual ideas valuable. Just as the reading equate intellectual worth like drinking champagne because it does not mean that artist is not valuable, so is it just accepting the obvious it is personal choice. Marx raises issues, he does not say that art has no value, and everything serves a function. There is a underhanded implication within Marx’s writings, he speaks with “ifs’” speaking of music as a product, it maybe that he is talking of the disparity of value, due to one’s career, and such… He is questioning how things are valued, and to raise that idea it raises the question of how is art valued today? How do we value art? If you look at a broader scope value is derived through layers of cultural understanding, aesthetics’ to give some examples. Art is a product of supply and demand within the American cultural value system. Value can be a question of comprehension, if someone does not understand what performance art is would they pay to go and see it… no, for there is no value without identification. Is art valued by the connection it creates to one’s work? Value is ethereal based value, is value formed through cost of production is material value increase the value system of work? Richard Cierra’s work being huge steel forms can be valued at say a million dollars, and a small hand drawing of Picasso’s can be of the same value. What does that do to the economy? Paying for art is paying for the social contextual expression of the time.
Friday, February 9, 2007
readings 2/8/07
What is success for you in the arts? What does one define as successful? Is it fame, is it money, or is it purely conceptual? It can be defined as personally conceptual expression, to be able to articulate what is it one thinks, feels and has experienced. It is the mergence of personal expression and achieves transcendental financial means. Success does include being able to do what it that I want to do…using the materials necessary to achieve that esthetic. Why do we pursue our MFA’s? It is the expensive, yet necessary tool to function within artistic society, plus working with other artist can assist one in reaching one personal conceptual growth within their work. The benefits of the university facilities draws one as well since it lends one to technical growth by providing resources financially unreachable other wise. A University is a “pressure cooker” since it refines one political as well as one’s social relevance within society since that is questioned and scrutinized. This also builds one’s contacts that are necessary within the artistic process. Or is the university a “sweat shop” are we the tool of the bureaucratic realm? Is it a pyramid scheme? Students do perpetuate the universities growth and creates the “need” for more students by the means of financial gain with little return to the students themselves. The university is a dogmatic dictatorship… that leaves little choice to the students as to what they want to learn being that those choices are laid out before the students. Does the university “sweat shop” just prepare one for the true realm demands within life? Being given responsibilities lean itself to personal growth. If Jack Welpott’s theory of becoming a “flake” allows one to teach outside the bureaucratic rules! Meeting and paper work are one means to an end but there are other ways. Since we are all flakes can’t we all anarchistic-ally get along together?
What makes art worthy of a financial fiscal value? Is artwork valued by past pre-requisites financial value? How is artwork valued? Is it for personal satisfaction; is it for financial gain, or social status? Does this go back to the idea within the reading that artwork is the same commodity value as money. This is a romantic, idealistic notion of art but does it with stand within society? I would have to say, sorry a little cynically no, since material values are defined socially within the bureaucratic system. It is a material substance signed by an individual. What is a public perception of artists? Does this tie into financial value? Do artists have social responsibility? Or are the drunken poets that are self-gratifying flakes?
Artist as skilled workers, the artist as virtuoso, the artist is a rule breaker as well as an intellectually (scientific in a way, inventors) this creates a myth of a genius. The artist is also an entrepreneur this notion gives the artist a fiscal substance and negates the mythical theory of the starving artist. Artists are social healers, artwork is expressive of the social needs within society giving weight to the needs within society: addressing, expressing and offering social relevance by offering solutions to the needs of society.
To summarize in the words of our Andy W. “Be the artist that you are!”
Every artist embodies the ideas within the stereotypes and roles alluded to within the readings. Any profession has a mythology surrounding it stereotypes can be placed on someone or to take on their image such as Andy W. projecting the personal that he used to sell his work. The artist view one person’s personality vs the content of their work, which become historically documented. Is judging one’s professional persona easier to judge once they are dead, since the artist can be seen within the force of their work on the social realms. Part of the mythology of Van Gogh is the madness of his work, and the story of his ear being cut off. Andy W. created his own myth to promote himself appeared to be that he entertained himself. Andy W. was a charlaton, he made a game out of prosperity and his work, that takes gumption to bring that up within his work. Andy W. work after he died the value of his work dropped showing that his persona was of more value and further interest. He was a very calculating person, he was the mark and he was his own promoter.
What makes art worthy of a financial fiscal value? Is artwork valued by past pre-requisites financial value? How is artwork valued? Is it for personal satisfaction; is it for financial gain, or social status? Does this go back to the idea within the reading that artwork is the same commodity value as money. This is a romantic, idealistic notion of art but does it with stand within society? I would have to say, sorry a little cynically no, since material values are defined socially within the bureaucratic system. It is a material substance signed by an individual. What is a public perception of artists? Does this tie into financial value? Do artists have social responsibility? Or are the drunken poets that are self-gratifying flakes?
Artist as skilled workers, the artist as virtuoso, the artist is a rule breaker as well as an intellectually (scientific in a way, inventors) this creates a myth of a genius. The artist is also an entrepreneur this notion gives the artist a fiscal substance and negates the mythical theory of the starving artist. Artists are social healers, artwork is expressive of the social needs within society giving weight to the needs within society: addressing, expressing and offering social relevance by offering solutions to the needs of society.
To summarize in the words of our Andy W. “Be the artist that you are!”
Every artist embodies the ideas within the stereotypes and roles alluded to within the readings. Any profession has a mythology surrounding it stereotypes can be placed on someone or to take on their image such as Andy W. projecting the personal that he used to sell his work. The artist view one person’s personality vs the content of their work, which become historically documented. Is judging one’s professional persona easier to judge once they are dead, since the artist can be seen within the force of their work on the social realms. Part of the mythology of Van Gogh is the madness of his work, and the story of his ear being cut off. Andy W. created his own myth to promote himself appeared to be that he entertained himself. Andy W. was a charlaton, he made a game out of prosperity and his work, that takes gumption to bring that up within his work. Andy W. work after he died the value of his work dropped showing that his persona was of more value and further interest. He was a very calculating person, he was the mark and he was his own promoter.
Tuesday, February 6, 2007
"Embodiment - The bodily aspects of human subjectivity. Embodiment is the central theme in European phenomenology, with its most extensive treatment in the works of Maurice Merleau-Ponty. Merleau-Ponty’s account of embodiment distinguishes between the objective body,which is the body regarded as a physiological entity, and the phenomenal body, which is not just some body, some particular physiological entity, but my (or your) body as I (or you) experience it. Of course, it is possible to experience one’s own body as a physiological entity. But this is not typically the case. Typically, I experience my body (tacitly) as a unified potential or capacity for doing this and that-typing this sentence, scratching that itch, etc. Moreover, this sense that I have of my own motor capacities (expressed, say, as a kind of bodily confidence) does not depend on an understanding of the physiological processes involved in performing the action in question.
The distinction between the objective and phenomenal body is central to understanding the phenomenological treatment of embodiment. Embodiment is not a concept that pertains to the body grasped as a physiological entity. Rather it pertains to the phenomenal body and to the role it plays in our object-directed experiences."
The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Second Edition General Editor: Robert Audi. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1999
"Embodiment refers to the biological and physical presence of our bodies, which are a necessary precondition for subjectivity, emotion, language, thought and social intereraction."
Musical Identities, Macdonald, Hargreaves and Miell. Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York, 2002
The expression ‘the body’ has become problematized and replaced with term ‘embodiment’. This change "corresponds directly to a shift from viewing the body as a nongendered, prediscusive phenomenon that plays a central role in perception, cognition, action and nature to a way of living or inhabiting the world through ones acculturated body." (Page xiv)
" If embodiment is an existential condition in which the body is the subjective source or intersubjective ground of experience, then studies under the rubric of embodiment are not 'about' the body per se. Instead they are about culture and experience insofar as these can be understood from the standpoint of bodily being-in-the-world." p. 143
Thomas Csordas in Perspectives on Embodiment by Weiss, G. and Haber, H., (eds.). Routledge; March, 1999
"Embodiment -
The bodily aspects of human subjectivity. Embodiment is the central theme in European phenomenology, with its most extensive treatment in the works of Maurice Merleau-Ponty. Merleau-Ponty’s account of embodiment distinguishes between the objective body,which is the body regarded as a physiological entity, and the phenomenal body, which is not just some body, some particular physiological entity, but my (or your) body as I (or you) experience it. Of course, it is possible to experience one’s own body as a physiological entity. But this is not typically the case. Typically, I experience my body (tacitly) as a unified potential or capacity for doing this and that-typing this sentence, scratching that itch, etc. Moreover, this sense that I have of my own motor capacities (expressed, say, as a kind of bodily confidence) does not depend on an understanding of the physiological processes involved in performing the action in question.
The distinction between the objective and phenomenal body is central to understanding the phenomenological treatment of embodiment. Embodiment is not a concept that pertains to the body grasped as a physiological entity. Rather it pertains to the phenomenal body and to the role it plays in our object-directed experiences."
The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Second Edition General Editor: Robert Audi. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1999
"Embodiment refers to the biological and physical presence of our bodies, which are a necessary precondition for subjectivity, emotion, language, thought and social intereraction."
Musical Identities, Macdonald, Hargreaves and Miell. Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York, 2002
The expression ‘the body’ has become problematized and replaced with term ‘embodiment’. This change "corresponds directly to a shift from viewing the body as a nongendered, prediscusive phenomenon that plays a central role in perception, cognition, action and nature to a way of living or inhabiting the world through ones acculturated body." (Page xiv)
" If embodiment is an existential condition in which the body is the subjective source or intersubjective ground of experience, then studies under the rubric of embodiment are not 'about' the body per se. Instead they are about culture and experience insofar as these can be understood from the standpoint of bodily being-in-the-world." p. 143
Thomas Csordas in Perspectives on Embodiment by Weiss, G. and Haber, H., (eds.). Routledge; March, 1999
The distinction between the objective and phenomenal body is central to understanding the phenomenological treatment of embodiment. Embodiment is not a concept that pertains to the body grasped as a physiological entity. Rather it pertains to the phenomenal body and to the role it plays in our object-directed experiences."
The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Second Edition General Editor: Robert Audi. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1999
"Embodiment refers to the biological and physical presence of our bodies, which are a necessary precondition for subjectivity, emotion, language, thought and social intereraction."
Musical Identities, Macdonald, Hargreaves and Miell. Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York, 2002
The expression ‘the body’ has become problematized and replaced with term ‘embodiment’. This change "corresponds directly to a shift from viewing the body as a nongendered, prediscusive phenomenon that plays a central role in perception, cognition, action and nature to a way of living or inhabiting the world through ones acculturated body." (Page xiv)
" If embodiment is an existential condition in which the body is the subjective source or intersubjective ground of experience, then studies under the rubric of embodiment are not 'about' the body per se. Instead they are about culture and experience insofar as these can be understood from the standpoint of bodily being-in-the-world." p. 143
Thomas Csordas in Perspectives on Embodiment by Weiss, G. and Haber, H., (eds.). Routledge; March, 1999
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)