Readings/Thoughts:
We red a selection of "Chromophobia" which (in an extremely difficult to understand manner) discussed (I think) the cultural connotations of "white". I said that I thought I hold the opposite aesthetics of most people. I find worn clothing and gear much more pleasing then new gear. I like my pants that have at least 6 holes in them better then the decent looking ones I am wearing today (because I have mentoring- no holes in clothing allowed).
I shared this thought with a friend, and she responded that I was not weird (in this one regard) and that she shared my aesthetics judgment. I tried to play devil's advocate and persuade her that we were in the minority, to no avail. Any way, I am all for worn, beat up, n^th patched, ectera belongings. Broken in things are so much more comfortable on the body and on the eyes.
In terms of art: I seem to keep doing things that I think are bad art but are sort of a tease at other canonical art that I also think is bad. here is one example:
We red a selection of "Chromophobia" which (in an extremely difficult to understand manner) discussed (I think) the cultural connotations of "white". I said that I thought I hold the opposite aesthetics of most people. I find worn clothing and gear much more pleasing then new gear. I like my pants that have at least 6 holes in them better then the decent looking ones I am wearing today (because I have mentoring- no holes in clothing allowed).
I shared this thought with a friend, and she responded that I was not weird (in this one regard) and that she shared my aesthetics judgment. I tried to play devil's advocate and persuade her that we were in the minority, to no avail. Any way, I am all for worn, beat up, n^th patched, ectera belongings. Broken in things are so much more comfortable on the body and on the eyes.
In terms of art: I seem to keep doing things that I think are bad art but are sort of a tease at other canonical art that I also think is bad. here is one example:
I also did some math-art. People in the art building/department love to talk about the fibbaci sequence and the golden ratio. As far as I could tell none of them understood why or how these things were related, so I scribbled out a proof and put it on my wall. (I had to assume the limit exists...) You might say a tall order for an artist, but understanding the proof only requires high-school mathematics. I am continuing to work on the solid paddle, and will finally get to use the planner tomorrow morning. I did get to practice using the other tools on the-still-way-to-thick blade. Hence I might be better at using them when their marks (or lack there of) will influence the final project.
I have been not super happy lately (as in today?...) and its bleeding into my thoughts about art. I am frustrated by the fact that when ever I talk about critically acclaimed art (from senior sem or arts since 1945) with my friends (educated whitman students) there reactions is almost always something best expressed as: "What the fuck?". Hence the challenge is to make art that the person on the street (or perhaps the Whitman student on the campus) can understand. (and wants to understand/engage on first glance). At the same time (although to me of decidedly secondary importance) to make art that art (and art history) students/faculty can engage in on a deeper level. This idea is also coming from a video on Mike Kelley who said something extremely similar to the above. (although in my opinion was entirely unsuccessful at the first part). I guess my beliefs in democracy influence my art making. I would rather make something that more people (irrelevant of their art sophistication) can relate to, then a piece that is critically acclaimed by the small and important subset of the populace, but flabbergasts most people. (I am not claiming that I could do the second.)
On a similar note; the plethora of ridiculous art makes it tempting to just join in with them. For example, a work called "Shoot" someone had his friend shoot him in the arm in a gallery. Another artist invites the audience to use a bunch of weapons upon her (in a gallery). Hence if I invite nature to solidly thrash and (small chance mom) kill me is that art? I could just go kayak class IV-V every weekend, shot photos of it (as in Shoot and the other performance piece. They took photos to document the "art work") and call it my senior thesis. Somehow I don't think it would fly. But if Whitman is going to the teach the above as art then it in some sense would be obligated to accept my beat-downs as art. (I had an ugly line off of Husum this weekend). I (as of yet) have no plans to actually do this, but it is tempting...a) it would be fun, b) it would force people who respect absurd art to try dismiss my art on grounds that could equally dismiss art that is canonical. (I guess I have a mean streak here, of wanting to corner people).
subjectivity....
On more of a life note, there is a light switch in the science building that a plastic thing is affixed so that the light cannot be turned off. I asked my professor why, and he said because its on a 40 minute motion sensor timer. I wonder if he leaves his lights on at home for 40 minutes after he has left the room. Said device may have a screw-driver taken to it in the near future by someone.
On a similar note; the plethora of ridiculous art makes it tempting to just join in with them. For example, a work called "Shoot" someone had his friend shoot him in the arm in a gallery. Another artist invites the audience to use a bunch of weapons upon her (in a gallery). Hence if I invite nature to solidly thrash and (small chance mom) kill me is that art? I could just go kayak class IV-V every weekend, shot photos of it (as in Shoot and the other performance piece. They took photos to document the "art work") and call it my senior thesis. Somehow I don't think it would fly. But if Whitman is going to the teach the above as art then it in some sense would be obligated to accept my beat-downs as art. (I had an ugly line off of Husum this weekend). I (as of yet) have no plans to actually do this, but it is tempting...a) it would be fun, b) it would force people who respect absurd art to try dismiss my art on grounds that could equally dismiss art that is canonical. (I guess I have a mean streak here, of wanting to corner people).
subjectivity....
On more of a life note, there is a light switch in the science building that a plastic thing is affixed so that the light cannot be turned off. I asked my professor why, and he said because its on a 40 minute motion sensor timer. I wonder if he leaves his lights on at home for 40 minutes after he has left the room. Said device may have a screw-driver taken to it in the near future by someone.