I have never wanted to got to an art school for college, and I have never really seen it as an option for me. That being said, I really did enjoy attending the college symposium. It was interesting hearing different people's experience with college, especially with so many of them going to the same college and studying different things. I am disheartened by VCU not allowing artists to go into courses at their level like MICA does. It seemed like there were a lot of people who are embarrassingly uneducated about art for an art school. How does a college student not know what the primary colors are. My brother is 9 and only cares about Fortnite, and still he knows what primary colors are. I think that this symposium has drawn me farther away from considering going to art college. It seemed like the structure of art school and the types of classes you have to take wouldn't benefit me. I need more structure than what they can give, also I like other subjects way to much not to focus on them in college. I wish you had asked more questions to the people who have graduated to describe their experience finding work as a person having graduated from art school. I think that is what pushes most people at MLWGS away from going to an art school. The job uncertainty and insecurity are daunting.
This is arguably a very messy work of art, which is part of the reason I chose to react to it as opposed to other things I saw. I thought maybe understanding other's motivations to work messily would help inspire Coach Halls goal for me to create "messy" artwork. I really like the way he uses destruction and dis-assemblage to reveal a deeper meaning and texture "lurking beyond the surface." I think destruction of my work after I made it could be a fun way to draw in more content. Like taking an actual knife to the canvas. It's inclusion of ropes and knots intrigues me and reminds me of a project that I did in eighth grade where I tied rope around two forearms and hands that I made. I really like that repetition and might include it in further works as an added 3D element. Furthermore I was really draw to his color palette. I love the way the warm red tones interact with light blue dispersed everywhere. It is breath taking. But in his more blue pieces, he uses yellow to brightly accent his work. I really like this form of color play, where there are a bunch of similar colors and then one to offset them and create beautiful contrast.
I am curious as to how he deals with making art on such a large scale. Does he compartmentalize, focusing on one specific section and then moving or or does he deal with the canvas as a whole all at one time. Since I want to continue to work on a large scale, learning from someone who successfully works on a much larger scale would be beneficial. I am interested in how people usually react to his work. I first came at it from a purely aesthetic viewpoint, since I didn't know the content and thus disregarded it. But can others draw the meaning more easily. That is one of the things I wouldn't give him a hundo on if I were grading it. His content isn't very obvious and it would be challenging for people who have not read his artist statements to understand. So I think I will stick to my overly blunt depiction of self-harm in my work.
Overall I really enjoyed this trip and seeing this exhibit. It was wonderful and stunning and think I learned a lot abotu process and its deep involvement in content and the meaning behind a work.
Link to video about Mark Bradford and his exhibit at the Hirshhorn:
I tried to find his website to link it, but the link he has on his facebook's domain is being sold, and I can't find the new address so I cant' link it
I just want to comment that the last two Lunchtime Lecturers(Sasha Waters Freyer and John Freyer) have the same last name: Freyer. Are they related or is this just a coincidence?
Link to a Youtube video explaining All my Life for Sale on the Conan O'Briaen Show: www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSmCwMRWPMM
Also I have no idea how to give a credit line to his work because they are so complex and especially for All My Life for Sale have a huge amount of elements and media. Because of that, I am not going to give them credit lines beyond the name of the project associated with each picture.
Kehinde Wiley, The Two Sisters, Oil on linen, 2012, 96 x 72 inches
Interesting article that shares more about the owners of Try-Me and their view of the art they own:
On Wednesday the 20th of February, we had another Lunchtime Lecture and Sasha Waters Freyer. She is the Department Chair of Photography and Film at VCU, and she is a Film maker. I mainly focused on her discussions regrading her short films. They remind me a lot of collages, but with a third detention of time added on. I liked the experimental nature of them and the visuals reminded me of serial killers for some weird reason. If the music was in a higher pitch and slower the clip we were shown could fit in a horror movie. Freyer said she liked to use "the medium of film as plastic artistic medium," akin to painting, especially in its shot structure. So, a self-identified painter, I immediately started to recognize the relationship between the two. They are both very fluid, time consuming art forms that need intense patience, and require so much planning(or winging it as many people[me] tend to do) and preciseness to achieve a certain goal. However, they both have an unrestricted freedom about them, allowing their creators to do whatever they want in order to express themselves. Although I would never try this medium, because I don't have nearly enough patience to work with technology, I appreciate it weirdness, also it seems really expensive, or at least Documentary work is expensive. I feel bad for her that this film making can't be her career and that she has to supplement it with teaching and writing, but I understand that not everyone can do what they love most as a profession, because if that was the case my sister would be a professional sleeper, and my brother would be a professional Fortnite addict. I appreciate the messages that she is trying to portray in her documentaries, giving a voice to outcasts, and people who usually don't get the spotlight, and I generally like her work.
I don't really like looking at abstract expressionism, or non-objective art, but I didn't completely hate some of the things I saw. I liked the Pollock piece that I saw simply because it brought back childhood memories of reading "Olivia" where she say a Pollock piece and recreated it on her wall. I respect him more than other non-objective artists because his concept of basically 100% splatter painting was pretty unique and hadn't really been done before him. I don't really like Clyfford Still's work though. It just feels to simple to me, and doesn't look like there was a lot of effort put into it. Despite my dislike of his artwork, I am intrigued as to how he created the texture of his artwork. It has lots of little bumps covering it and I can't for the life of my figure out how they were made. The Pollock painting was made with lots of quick rushed motion, with big flings of paint coming from the shoulder. The Still's painting in comparison was made with more careful methodical movements even though they both share a non-objective art style. The de Kooning piece was made with quick brush strokes in the background, but slower and more careful in rendering JFK's face and body. I was really surprised by the size of these works, I think it is because I usually work on a smaller scale, so really anything bigger than that is a surprise to me. I was also surprised by the fact that the presidential portrait of JFK was made by an abstract expressionist artist. All of the other portraits, with the exception of Chuck Close's Bill Clinton, were highly detailed and realistic. I still don't really know what I am going to do for my abstract expressionist painting, but I was thinking of either having a limited color scheme like Still's or just strait out having a giant rainbow as my painting. I am intrigued by the texture of Still's painting, so I also want to mimic it even if I don't entirely know how to. I think the process will be fun at least.
Inspiration for Play Pages
None of these works really relate to what I have been doing in my play pages. I've mostly just been drawing people in a variety of mediums, some of which I don't really ever use and some of which I uses a lot. These just have vibes that I really enjoy. I like the Sargent piece because there is so much in your face that you can't really understand what it going on. I also love the color scheme. I have found that I am drawn to browns and dark colors in general. I am also in love with the texture of this piece. It doesn't really show up well in the photo, but there is a build up of paint in some strokes that I desperately wanted to touch just to experience the piece more. I love the O'Keeffe painting mostly because I am in love with her, and because I think the comments on her artwork looking like vaginas are hilarious(I asked a few gynecologist-I was at a work party for my mom right after the field trip- if they though her work looked like a vagina and they said "sure" so I'm taking that to mean it does). I just love the femininity that it exudes with the soft lines and colors. One my my favorite pieces though, was the Pulse Room by Rafael Lozano-Hemmer. It was beautiful and really calming especially after reading that it is supposed to mimic a scene where a character was in death's cavern. I especially loved how you could hear and feel the pulses. These works make me want to branch out with my artwork more and do things other than painting acrylic portraits, I want to experiment more with sculpture and I want to paint different subjects like flowers, backgrounds, or even light bulbs.
Mexican, b. 1967
Incandescent light bulbs, voltage controllers, heart rate sensor, computer, metal stand, speakers, custom software in Delphi
Courtesy the artist and bitforms gallery
Hirshhorn Museum, Washington DC
I am a sleep deprived artist trying to make ends meet. :)