Craft & Methods of production

I like this week lecture. Why? Although my major is not art, most of the art works which Anya Kivarkis introduced to us are about jewelry. For most girls, these works are very attractive things, what’s more, they are the highly skillful jewelry—most of these jewelry we can’t see in our daily life. Among these amazing art works, Marilyn Minter attracted me most, and her work is from the category about handmade reproduction original copies. At first look, high heel is decorated with shining diamond attracted my all attention. The fantastic combination of splashing oil, bruised and dirty foot and fashionable high heels laced with rhinestones, it’s an iconic image viewed from a low angle, a larger than life paean to both pain and beauty. The third work of her we saw on the class is the sexy red lips bite the string of pearls which is covered with sweat, in a lurid display of ornamentation and ritual pain. All of them made me feel shocked deeply. I don’t know how to express my feeling more emotional in English, but that impact is not only visually, but also psychologically. In Minter’s work, makeup and jewelry work to highlight either imperfection or penchants for self-destruction and avarice. I remembered Anya Kivarkis said that the art of style of Marilyn Minter is ‘when everything goes wrong’. It’s really interesting. I searched the information about her online, seeing the sentences like this: ‘if you’re walking through Anya wondering what sort of fashion crisis could have spawned an ad campaign in which haute couture literally gets down in the mud, what you really will be experiencing is what happens when painting and photography collide with our perverse ambivalence toward fashion.’ From these words, I can get that it’s disquieting combination of the art works of Marilyn Minter, she deftly captures the fluidity and ambiguity of bodies that cannot easily be contained by standards of propriety and acceptable beauty.

Another art which Anya introduced to us in the class leave me a deep impression is from Karl Fritsch, which belong to the category—limited serial production. The rings which he designed are fantastic and best. (After looking, the shining, colorful, special, and super cute ring, I super want one!!!) The craft and method of his production is special, he used common gold, gemstone, iron, and emeralds, then he piled them precariously on top of one another, pressing them into roughly formed setting, pierced, unpolished, oxidized, or inserted into the eyes of small skulls. He created wholly unique and inspired renovations of traditional jewelry, in his own special feature to win applause.

The different methods Anya Kivarkis talked about were handmade production, reproduction, mass production, limited serial production and post-production with intervention. I can find some of those methods in John Feodorov’s work. After I saw his famous work, he is a funny man in my opinion. When I saw his art work, I think I can read the humor and some elements about religion from his work. One of his art work, Tyrras showed in Blackboard is the most interesting one. In this work, at first look, it’s funny for me to see 12different animals in different color and use feather as dividing line. But when I looked the work carefully, I can get the author’s opinion like that John Feodorov as a biracial artist—the Navajo and European American decent, thereby, his work comically confronts native American stereotypes, like this ‘Animal Spirit Channeling Device for the Contemporary Shaman’. I know that the principal of Shaman way is staying with nature in harmony, there is no level difference, and the 12 animals are their faith. In this work, I can see the method--post-production, which means when the artist takes something that they did not design and changes it some how to make it their own. Except the Shaman animals, he also took classic spin and adds feathers all over it, along with writing spirit under all the animal names.

The other piece of him I think cute is ‘Ted Bear’, the teddy bear was given totem spirit masks to wear in place of their original face, from here, I can get that John Feodorov used the method of post-production again to finish this work. He stated that the bear is spiritual and powerful in Navaho beliefs. But when you buy it, you still don’t have power to over it, the beliefs, faith, and wishes are priceless. In the ‘Office Shaman’, he did the same thing, putting spirituality into a capitalism idea of the office job and confronts it with something important and spiritual. I remember in his interview, he said that: "Western culture likes to castrate the powerful, maybe because it doesn't want to be less powerful than something else, that maybe it has to bring everything down to a level where...well, maybe it's capitalism really, to where it's a product, to where it's something that can be controlled by purchase, controlled by owning it and by owning, even in art." I think that the reason why his works are previous is that we can feel the depth of his minds in his work, and we also can’t buy these spirits when you buy his work.  

This work is from John Feodorov. From the girl’s perspective, this work is colorful and interesting. I saw a comment about these work, ‘Some have his characteristic puffy cheeked silhouette with various eccentric tableaux. The more you look, the more you wander off into some crazy land where nothing is quite as it seems.’ Yeap~The more I wander about this piece, it really a crazy land, at this land, I saw a lot of emotions, happy, sad, humours, helpless, powerful and some elements about religions. In brief, when I saw his work, I can feel warm and happy~~

Death of the Author

From the Tuesday lecture—‘art & environment’, I found an interesting thing that images show the experience. Why I say this? Because in the beginning Miss instructor asked us a question that ‘what do you see from the environment is interesting?’ Everyone must have the different images, because of the different experience. Before I came to class, I was waiting outside and siting before the glass door at first floor.  When I sat in silence, I can see the clear rain lines drop down on the window, clear, transparent and looming, those feeling made me feel relax and comfortable suddenly. Maybe other saw the same scene, they may never have the feeling like I felt this way.  Thereby, when I in the class, when the instructor said ‘everyone can be art suppliers’,  I have had a very strong resonance. Although not everything  is art, when you see something in an art way, you can think you are seeing an art work. Like when I saw raining in normal times, I would not feel like that. But when I tried to focus on the interesting phenomenon, I would think it’s art. From the romantic tradition into modernism into postmodernism, everyone has different feelings in the different age of art, despite their overall style is the same.       

Thereby, that make me thinking of the "Death of the Author," which written by Roland Barthes. It seems like these two things seem analogous. Bart said no matter what the intent of the author, text only has consistency on himself. But as long as the text once published or rendered, readers met with encounter, they may think in the cultural way, and thinking, creating meaning for themselves. Those text viewers would always change, instability, and allow question to find the real meaning. They are not concerned about its general structure, but the creative reading.  Stripping from the authority and criticism of the author, giving the meaning  and interpretation of the right to viewer and bringing more literary space of creativity to reader. Thereby, in the multiplicity of writing, everything is to be disentangled, nothing deciphered. This idea of Roland Barthes completely turned traditional reading  to a new way. Also, the cost of the born of reader must be the death of author. Every time you are reading something, while you are writing something. Readers with their own unique blend of criticism, interpretation, explanation, using their experience or interests in the idea of writing text, at the same times, the collapse of the traditional method of reading. He will be liberated from the authority of the author. The real talker is not the author, but the language. If there is anything I gather a wealth of diversity, that is not the author, but a reader. In my own opinion, ‘Death of the Author’ in favor of the independent life outside of the work itself. The moment when the author completed works, the relationship between the author and work is going to the end, the right of the real meaning is given to the reader. Roland Barthes once said that ‘a piece of the immortal, not because it imposed a meaning that added to different people, but to everyone, it suggests that a different meaning.’ The most important thing to a work is the meaning which reader gave. Thereby, right of interpretation has been released back in the hands of readers, symbolizing the death of author and the regeneration to readers.( I know this is an abstract type, please excuse my grammar mistakes, I'm going to try my best to explain what I really wanna say~~~~but u, the viewer, you can create the meaning if u want, I wish I can give you the power).

Thereby, when I saw the art work which from Kiki Smith, at first, I think I have no idea about that. But Tyrras said we should bring something into art work, then associated with my own experience, I think that Kiki Smith worked with various kinds of materials and many topics of which include shame, our relationship to nature, and she is even considered to be a feminist artist. I remembered that in the interview Kiki said such sentences, ‘ I long for something radical--whether it be in my own work or in the art world. Works of art world seems to have been continuously outputs dominates, it is no longer exist as an interesting art world, and I now is one of the products manufactured. These are all artists can't decide. When I first came to New York really took no small effort to practice this. I remember at that time, I wanted to do something other than my own, but sometimes I do not have such a personality.’Kiki see themselves really rather surprising, especially after watching so many of her works, but the truth is probably that, although mood heated Kiki works, always impose an unexpected powerful influence to the audience, but Kiki I was in a very naive point of view of their own creation. Like she said, she sometimes doesn't understand art, she will feel like a ordinary art is weird. But she believed the goddess of inspiration from art, Goddess when art came when she had to do was follow the just do it. Art for her was such that is not complicated. (By the way, I really wanna say that she looks like Professor Trelawney in Harry Potter.)

As regards the William Kentridge--anything is possible, I really appreciate his creative minds. Does every people who have strange ideas in order to become an artist? William Kentridge said that, ‘Absurdity] is in fact an accurate and a productive way of understanding the world. Why should we be interested in a clearly impossible story? Because, as Gogol says, in fact the impossible is what happens all the time.’ When I saw the process of his work and idea,  I understood the meaning of why he said anything is possible. Like his own words, ‘With its playful bending of reality and observations on hierarchical systems, the world of The Nose provides an ideal vehicle for Kentridge. The absurdism, he explains in the documentary's closing, "...is in fact an accurate and a productive way of understanding the world. Why should we be interested in a clearly impossible story? Because, as Gogol says, in fact the impossible is what happens all the time.’

Digital Art

Digital arts is a part of art. I really enjoy the lecture which John Park given to us. He is a nice guy with humor, and the art materials which he showed in class in high level. Because with the development of our society, more and more art work is associated with digital technology. Although the digital media made the art work more artistic and visual impact, like john said, there still more and more questions about that is technology means losing humanity?  No~~~Like john’s comments, contemporary media practice involves a rigorous investigation of, and engagement with continually evolving technologies, the digital arts program encourages people to combine an understanding of the theoretical discourses of new media and visual arts with strong technical sophistication, a rich sense of visual design and an ability to articulately express themselves as artists. I agree with this explanation about digital art, they all are the processing of art, using digital technology as an essential part of the creative process. From my own view, I think that the most special significant of digital art is using the digital technology to transform the traditional art work to raise a new level. I am not saying that traditional art work is not good enough, but you can’t deny that, digital technology made these art works play a different effect and give them a new colorful life~~~~

In fact, when we don’t pay close attention to ‘digital media’, it has already appeared around us. Facebook~~~yeah! Like Tyrras said in the class, her friends in Facebook is around 500, but, actually maybe just 9 in the real life! I know it’s just a joking. But I think that the virtual world of the Internet always let us have an illusion that we are in the good fellowship with others than we thought. Thereby, maybe, you have a question that is digital media means hiding the truth? From the video we saw on class—Can you see me now, we can get the answer. This fantastic video is about the collision when real life versus virtual world. It’s an interesting video, at first time I didn’t figure it out, but when I saw it at second time, I understand the purpose of this activity. When virtual world meet real life, the reality in real world can not be ignored. Digital media is not hiding the truth and reality, to a certain extent, it’s facilitates real. (I knew ‘facilitate’ can’t express what I really mean here, but I can’t find more suitable words~~) It is worth mentioning that when I saw the Feng Mengbo’s photo, I was shocked by his special and creative ideas. He explained the politics in China in the fun way. I like his thought about art, which is using the elements of popular culture, such as vedio games, into the creation of new digital art. At the same time, this special skill help him to express his opinion about politics. I was inspired by his idea that using the digital and new media to show the different themes. I always think that art is a whole life thing, there will be a lot of art works, we should not limit the art in a regular field, constrain the themes of art and the media of art.

The other good creative idea is thought of by David Byrne. He took the devices which can’t make sounds by themselves, but when they were put together, they can cause vibrations of building elements, resonate, oscillating, making the building itself to become a very large musical instruments. After I viewed the whole site, I don’t know how to answer the question which Tyrras gave to us—who is the artist here? I only want to say that David Byrne and the participants, both of them are indispensable. Without David Byrne, this fantastic idea had not begun, not to mention the future artistic works. Without the participants, those all the devices and design are empty and abiosis. Because the participation of both, creative ideas combined with the different participants’ various inspirations, feelings, emotions and moods, these are all mixed together can wipe out the amazing spark. And I also think that this work in terms not pushing boundaries between the performance and the artist but to blend them together. Each participant’s performance appears to be independent, there is no connection between them, but the existence of these art work which all because of the organization from David Byrne. The various audience get the different feeling from the different participant’s creative works. To an artist, a lot of different and wonderful resonances mean the biggest praise.

The artist Paul Pfeiffer which Tyrras introduced to us is a visual artist, at least it seems to me like that.  I remembered Pfeiffer said that many of his works invite viewers to exercise their imagination or project their own fears and obsessions onto the art object. But when I saw his art work, it’s not easy for me to understand what thing he really wanted to show us without explanatory note. Like in the ‘Corner Piece’ it’s confused when I first see, but after I saw his explanation, I understood how he thought.  The contradiction between a kind of heroism and the empty of the loser, at the same time, that individual seems almost to get swallowed up by the spectacle itself. When those contrast emotion appearing on one screen, Preiffer used digital technology to deal with the picture, making the protagonist fuzzy and using the expression on the audience to illstrute what happening. Using the digital technology to present art works, there is no doubt that it’s a good form to interpret art!!

Photo can tell Story

How do you think about photos? I don’t know you, but when I saw a photo, yeah, like Tyrras said, I think it means true. I believe that everything I saw is real, because I can think the sounds which I listened to is unreal, the feeling which I felt is unreal, but nothing can escape into my eyes. Through the Craig’s presentation, I changed my opinion. (by the way, I like this nice guy, I enjoy his talking speed and witty humor, I also enjoy his photos which he showed to us in his Facebook~~~~). Nowadays, in the modern technological society, everything can be an illusion, even if it is something you see. In the Errol Morris’ "Photography as a Weapon", I never thought that even international event photo can be trickery. When I saw on July 10, a photograph of four Iranian missiles streaking heavenward, I was deeply shocked by this. This is my first time to see clearly ‘lie in photo’. When it comes to the political dimension, just like Hany Farid said: If you want to trick someone with a photograph, there are lots of easy ways to do it. You don’t need Photoshop. You don’t need sophisticated digital photo-manipulation. You don’t need a computer. All you need to do is change the caption. After I have read this passage, my truest response at first time is that I used to think software such as Photoshop is only for little girls like me to entertain with friends, unexpectedly, for political purposes, those greedy politicians also used Photoshop. Suddenly, I felt like Ps my own photos having a political significance~~hahahaha~ okay, go back to my topic, which point is inspire me is that when I saw the photo which after artist editing, I felt that the artist imitated the behavior of politicians to PS photos from an arts perspective to entertain the public while ironically laughing at those politicians’ greedy purposes, which is creative.

Through the Craig’s presentation, I also find an interesting thought, which is when people saw a photo, most of them like to imagine these photos’ stories by themselves. I remembered one sentence: You have your fear, which become reality, and then you have Godzilla, who is reality. Interesting view, uhhhhh~~Like, among the materials which Craig showed to us in the class, one photo made a deep impression on me—Ezra Stoller’s Manufacturer’s Trust Company, at first sight, I thought that oh my god, this is the library in UO, how deluxe! But when I saw the title, I laughed out of sound. I wanna say that the pictures is an illusion, partly because Photoshop software, partly because our assumption. We always want to try to understand the story in the photo by our own experience.

In our Tuesday lecture, when I saw the product which made by JR, I was deeply shocked by the photos and stories. I never heard this guy before, but when I saw his video, I was attracted by his creativity, vision, leadership, and persuasion. When I listened to Tyrras to introduce his background, stunning work, tough and even a bit dangerous working environment, looming and dashing figure, all of these, let my curiosity instantly had reached the top. When I saw those people's eyes in his shot, which instantly sent out my soul. Each eye is a living life, and some told uncomfortable, some in eyes of fear, some expressed hunger, some of them told the peace and love. In his view, I remembered that he said such a sentence, the general meaning is that his photos didn’t have any specific meanings, but in a general sense, all his work is about social justice and creating connections between different people. Whether it’s posting shots of Israelis and Palestinians with the same profession on the walls between the countries or putting up those shots of African and Brazilian women’s eyes in Cambodia, he’s compelling people to think about other people. Therefore, when I saw these eyes in second times and third times, I try to imagine them as giant eyes. Because the photos which in JR’s shooting, they all have moving stories, as well as the stories behind the heroes are strong on the pursuit of happiness, these all the behavior which belong to gaint. Whereupon, the most different point between JR and other artists is that JR’s work transcended language, borders and politics-which is precisely the point. Through the eyes of JR, I've seen that the warm, happy, positive side in some developing countries. I feel that I have established relationships with their instant. Just one thing I don't understand, why did he put his works on the building and then copy to enlarge? do you have any special significance?

         Comparing to JR, there is less sense for me when I saw the products which made by Alfredo Jaar. I knew him that his ‘The Gramsci Trilogy’ and ‘The Rwanda Project’ have great significance, but when I look at his work, there is no a lot resonances. But one of his work--“Let One Hundred Flowers Bloom” leave me an impression. Because this photo is talking about China. Although it is a reflection of China in the past which not good enough, the moral of this piece is also interesting. He explained this photo, which is conveyed to us that intellectuals may die – they may be cancelled – but will never die. As a Chinese, I deeply appreciate his positive impact of this piece conveys to me. His profound work, some I don't quite understand, but this works, I am much agree with and appreciate his thoughts and ideas. Through this photo I know the story and his minds.

         There is one thing I really want to mention is that thanks so much for Tyrras. Because almost every class, you introduced some art works which related to China. They are positive side, creative side and even the gloomy side in China, these all make me enjoy. As Chinese, I am very happy to have an opportunity to know more about China through the eyes of Westerners.