For a way of learning I was told by my lecture to look at Itunes U educational piece so to find resources to encourage my way of learning. This is a tool where speakers have discussions on different subjects such as Art. From this I found 3 different discussions that I felt linked in with my work at the time. These are:

Carter Ratcliff – The Point of Art

Lynne Tillman – Words Are Images, Too

Eleanor Heartney – Art Today: Tales of Plastic Surgery, Genetically Altered Rabbits, and Other Acts of Art

In Carter Ratcliff’s talk he spoke about what is art and what isn’t art so to explain the point in it. It said that art couldn’t be understood. It is something that has different meanings whenever you look at it. It also holds a sense of the history of art yet when viewed in the future it also relates what is happening at the time. This is due to them having a sense of individualism. Pieces of work that aren’t art are propaganda features. This is because they are created for a purpose with an objective in mind. So when the reason behind it is over they no longer have any link to what is happening and don’t link to the past. Just like something that is brought to put on a wall is only made so to be pretty so isn’t art. This is due to both propaganda and decorative pieces removes art meaning.

The second piece is Lynne Tillman’s Words Are Images, Too. I chose to look at this piece, as photography is a different way of looking at texts such as stories. Also I have an understanding of the use of words in art through graphics and typographic plus my interest in music.

Here she spoke about how words create an image from the description that they give. However, even with this description everyone still has a different image due to everyone having a unique interpretation of it. This is even the case with an existing image.

Next she went on to speak of her own work, Madam Realism and the way she critiques features. This work being based on how she looked at pieces and saw them as ugly, even including a piece that resembled her. Until she had a dream that she had turned into the piece based on her and went into her studio. Here she found her piece based on Michael Jackson crying, asking if she did not love him. From this she felt guilty and like she was being judged by her own work yet at the same time they were looking straight through her. Like when viewing an image, it doesn’t speak about the viewer yet because what is shown it speaks to the viewer. This made her feel like she could control the meaning of the work but can’t decide it due to different interpretations. The key is though that you need to be honest to the work and say why you like it or don’t because of the impact you feel towards it, not because of how close it is to the real thing. This is also important to Madam Realism due to her being a critique of art.

Finally I have looked at Eleanor Heartney’s, Art Today: Tales of Plastic Surgery, Genetically Altered Rabbits, and Other Acts of Art. This one I thought would be interesting to look at as it made you think what is art really about? Also are some of the things done in the name of art really worth it?

This she started off with by talking about other people’s work and how they are art along with how recreations of other people’s art are also classed as art. Yet they may have only taken an image of an image. This lead on to her saying about the piece could sell for $1 yet what else could you sell for a $1, your DNA and if you did who would that belong to? The person who brought it or the person who the DNA is inside of? Plus would that make it art and what else could you do.

For example

A person with the help of a laboratory created a glowing rabbit from injecting the rabbit with jellyfish DNA. The plan of which was to give his daughter the glowing rabbit as a present yet in the end the laboratory said no. Maybe because they wanted to keep experimenting, they had done the experimentation as there facilities were used or maybe because they didn’t want to alter animals and for future evolution to have glowing rabbits running about. This still held the question though is the glowing animal classed as art as it is individual and basically unusual or has consensus gone out the window and people are doing anything and classing it as art to get away with it? Due to a breakdown of ideas, taste and standards!

From this came the question on what is art? The answer being art is something that holds an importance as to how it reacts to society at the moment. Yet when you look to the future it also makes sense then as it still relates to the time. Making it be something that lives in different time zones like with technology today where people watch TV now, but majority of the time it was recorded in the past while being on the internet having a conversation or searching from what has been said in the past but is still going strong. Due to this no one lives in just one time zone any more, due to a manipulation of how time can be used. This is classed as art as it becomes different; it changes how people look at the world, their way of thinking and perception.

For a critique though the way art is looked at is also changed, as art is only a dialect, to then nowadays it is something you can talk about. This is due to the meaning always changing like due to the world around us always changing.

Viewing these three talks was interesting to me as it made me consider things differently. As before I never saw art as being something as everyone living his or her routine life. Yet when you think about it more it shows that art is literally everywhere. Also features that you wouldn’t class as art include art. However, how far would you go to class things as art and how much do you consider art if it was a person instead of material features? Due to this it has made me consider more of what art is actually about and including more meaning in my work instead of creating a piece on the spare of the moment response.

All in all when watching these videos I felt it was an effective tool to use as anyone nowadays has access to iTunes. Yet I did feel that when watching the videos due to the length my concentration dwindled as I had access to other tools. Although I could listen to them as mp3’s when on the move. This was helpful for some except for when it spoke about visuals that could not be viewed as it was based on only sound. As well as this some I gave up on due to the fact the quality of the audio and visuals were bad meaning you couldn’t view the images properly or hear it clearly. All in all though I did find that from the one’s I viewed, it as an interesting tool to find extra references and ways of looking at art. However, not something I wouldn’t use too often, as it wasn’t the best way for me to take in information without losing track quite a few times.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s