So far I have just started sketching thumbnails and cutting up newspaper to use in my paper mache. I was absent the day that we started this project, but hopefully I will be entirely caught up by next week!
0 Comments
across in a clear manner. One thing that was said in the article by the members of The Guerrilla Girls was that they “…try to be different from the kind of political art that is angry and points to something and says ‘This is bad.’ That’s preaching to the converted…” (p. 7, The Guerrilla Girls Are Still Relevant After All These Years). Reading this forced me think about the art that I have seen and agreed with the content of, and wonder if this art effects other people in the same way that it affects me. I think that this is hard to avoid when you are passionate about what you are talking about, especially through art because there is so much that you have to assume that the viewer understands or knows before trying to influence them through your work. I think that the Guerrilla Girls are effective in this way because the present facts and information in clear and clever way that present their point of view. Making your work less straight forward and still allowing to appeal to those who don't necessarily agree with you is likely much more difficult, but I'd love to see more work that is conscious of this problem and tries to address it in interesting ways. I thought that these two articles were very interesting and were able to expose me to different artists that I was not familiar with. I after being exposed to art that is also functional, such as the Inflatable Cobblestones created by the Eclectic Electric Collective in collaboration with Enmedio collective. This fusion of function and content was very interesting to me as I was reading about the inflatable cobblestones used a barriers at a protest. As we discussed whether or not a piece of art being functional diminishes its artistic value during our Socratic Seminar, I found it interesting that so many people thought it did. I personally don’t think it does, and I think that as long as you approach the creation of this functional art piece from a place of innovation and creation, that fact that it is made to serve a purpose doesn’t inherently diminish the artistic value of a piece. Of course it could just be a bad piece of art, but that is possible whether or not it is a functional piece of art. It also might be harder to approach a functional piece of art in a way that allows for it to be seen as art, and not just an unusually designed object, but when it succeeds, I think this functionality adds something extra to the piece of art. I loved this reading and there wasn’t any part of it that I would remove, but I would add some more information about protest are found in other parts of the world. We may have less context for these works if we don’t know about the history or political climate of that specific country, but more information on a wider range of protest art and artists would be very interesting to me. I think that more specifically, performance art would be really interesting to look at. One person who I found, Petr Pavlensky, create very interesting, sometimes disturbing, protest performance art using his body. He is very controversial, and is seeking political asylum from Russia in France. Recently set set a bank on fire. When does art become not art. Is this art?
Below is an interview with Petr Interview Link! Setting a building on fire |