December18th, 2010
1. Epiphanies?
Yes, art can be anything. Art can be fun. Art can be accessible. Art can be a collage of mediums.
2. Goals?
Personally, I am on a road of discovery with Politics and women in art. Change is needed.
Check out:
The Feminist Evolution
Saturday, December 18, 2010
Monday, December 13, 2010
Lecture at the MoMA
December 11th, 2010
Today our class had the pleasure of engaging in a fundamental and philosophical conversation with the director of Adult and Academic programs of MoMa: Pablo Helguera. He presented his lecture in a private area, in which museum employees hold conferences. The space felt small, intimate and confidential. He started by asking our class, "What is art?" It seems that the more involved with art one becomes the less that question arises. Why would it, if we can reference artists in conversation and identify works of art from various time periods? Well when the big question was asked, the room was silent for about thirty seconds but felt like a lifetime.
This question is subjective and can be attacked from various angles. However, I feel that the most important aspect of the question is not to answer it but to engage in a conversation around it. The conversation began when Mr. Helguera showed a abstract painting and asked if it was art. All of us in the room agreed and he proceeded to explain how this painting won first prize in a juried art exhibit. The next slide contained the painting next to a photograph of a four year old child who painted the work. The child's mother had entered the painting as a joke and it won first place. After the judges found out that child had created the painting they revoked their decision. Mr. Helguera asked, "do you still think the painting is art?"
That was the beginning of a two hour conversation that could have lasted all afternoon. Even though we never came to a conclusion it was important to have that conversation. We debated issues with aesthetics, ownership, and conceptual aspects of art. I don't think anyone could actually come to a conclusion but it raised interesting issues dealing with art.
The creator's intention versus our interpretation has been an ongoing component in the history of what is defined as art. For example: weapons, artifacts, pottery and furniture that have been found, preserved and placed on display at a museum is now seen as art. We see it as an art because the objects are documents of history, time and culture. We cannot go back in time, therefore we must rely on evidence and make our own narratives about the past. Museums, in my opinion, created the idea of art. Museums are the attics that we roam and often visit to appreciate the human experience. It is almost safe to say that the definition of "art" evolves with us, politically, socially and technologically.
Today our class had the pleasure of engaging in a fundamental and philosophical conversation with the director of Adult and Academic programs of MoMa: Pablo Helguera. He presented his lecture in a private area, in which museum employees hold conferences. The space felt small, intimate and confidential. He started by asking our class, "What is art?" It seems that the more involved with art one becomes the less that question arises. Why would it, if we can reference artists in conversation and identify works of art from various time periods? Well when the big question was asked, the room was silent for about thirty seconds but felt like a lifetime.
This question is subjective and can be attacked from various angles. However, I feel that the most important aspect of the question is not to answer it but to engage in a conversation around it. The conversation began when Mr. Helguera showed a abstract painting and asked if it was art. All of us in the room agreed and he proceeded to explain how this painting won first prize in a juried art exhibit. The next slide contained the painting next to a photograph of a four year old child who painted the work. The child's mother had entered the painting as a joke and it won first place. After the judges found out that child had created the painting they revoked their decision. Mr. Helguera asked, "do you still think the painting is art?"
That was the beginning of a two hour conversation that could have lasted all afternoon. Even though we never came to a conclusion it was important to have that conversation. We debated issues with aesthetics, ownership, and conceptual aspects of art. I don't think anyone could actually come to a conclusion but it raised interesting issues dealing with art.
The creator's intention versus our interpretation has been an ongoing component in the history of what is defined as art. For example: weapons, artifacts, pottery and furniture that have been found, preserved and placed on display at a museum is now seen as art. We see it as an art because the objects are documents of history, time and culture. We cannot go back in time, therefore we must rely on evidence and make our own narratives about the past. Museums, in my opinion, created the idea of art. Museums are the attics that we roam and often visit to appreciate the human experience. It is almost safe to say that the definition of "art" evolves with us, politically, socially and technologically.
Hundreds of years from now, if this planet is still here, who knows what the future generations will consider as art.
It is the evidence we leave behind.
 |
| Through the secret doors of the Elevators.... |
 |
| Class lesson on Museum Tags |
 |
| James Ensor at the MoMA! |
 |
| Allora & Calzadilla s Eviscerated Piano Plays MoMA |
 |
| "Envision Spring" from Yoko Ono's Instruction Pieces |
Sunday, December 5, 2010
Welcome to the Upper East Side Galleries
Before the shit hits the fan, here is a list of the galleries that we visited:
It almost feels like the art world has not evolved thanks to the U.E.S. galleries. Everything is expensive and smells like death. The art works were situated in galleries that resembled the homes of the rich and old.
As if these galleries are not already intimidating, some of them had to buzz you in, and they pretend to be open to the public. Yet they're hidden and their main focus is to sell. I kept having to remind myself that these artworks have a specific audience:
1. An audience that claims to have good, high, or fine taste in art.
2. An audience that appreciates craft over concept.
3. An audience that plays it safe and perversely and uncomfortably affects the rest of the art world.
4. Oh and.....a very small audience who have a shit load of money to throw away.
I cannot help but think that art is a reflection of society and culture. And when these people die and these art works are then moved around the world, continue to be invested in or auctioned off, what is left to say about our society? What about the artist? Does anyone care about what the artist wanted?
However, it seems there is no goal for that kind of art, other than to play the game of desire. These works provoke d e s i r e for those who can afford it.
I refuse to believe that any of this craft is worth more than concept.
But then, should I even care? As an artist in this present time, a latina - young- woman and mother, should it bother me that these few people are willing to spend vasts amounts of money on what they claim to be as "high" art.
Knowing that the huge investments in the art world are being placed on works that play a decorative role in "higher" society.....affects how other artists price their work and survive just so that CAN continue to make work.
The AMAZING and most POSITIVE outcome of this trip was knowing that in the end, art should be accessible to the public. Art that is successful should be able to reach and affect the masses ( hopefully in a positive way ), regardless of income.
I also wonder, if women artists are making nearly as much money as male artists, especially in the upper east side....only through research will I able to know the answer.
It almost feels like the art world has not evolved thanks to the U.E.S. galleries. Everything is expensive and smells like death. The art works were situated in galleries that resembled the homes of the rich and old.
So why not spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on a piece that is showing across the street?
It will look lovely above your fire place.
As if these galleries are not already intimidating, some of them had to buzz you in, and they pretend to be open to the public. Yet they're hidden and their main focus is to sell. I kept having to remind myself that these artworks have a specific audience:
1. An audience that claims to have good, high, or fine taste in art.
2. An audience that appreciates craft over concept.
3. An audience that plays it safe and perversely and uncomfortably affects the rest of the art world.
4. Oh and.....a very small audience who have a shit load of money to throw away.
I cannot help but think that art is a reflection of society and culture. And when these people die and these art works are then moved around the world, continue to be invested in or auctioned off, what is left to say about our society? What about the artist? Does anyone care about what the artist wanted?
Maybe it is a little exciting that the art we make, lives a life of travel that we may never experience alive.
However, it seems there is no goal for that kind of art, other than to play the game of desire. These works provoke d e s i r e for those who can afford it.
I refuse to believe that any of this craft is worth more than concept.
But then, should I even care? As an artist in this present time, a latina - young- woman and mother, should it bother me that these few people are willing to spend vasts amounts of money on what they claim to be as "high" art.
Yes, it bothers me.
John Currin can SUCK IT, he paints porn sooooooooo beautifully on canvas.
The only respect for him that I have is this:
Thank you for playing the game so well and milking these bastards. You've only further exploited all the flaws in societal views on gender and sex.
Thank you, thank you, thank you.
Knowing that the huge investments in the art world are being placed on works that play a decorative role in "higher" society.....affects how other artists price their work and survive just so that CAN continue to make work.
The AMAZING and most POSITIVE outcome of this trip was knowing that in the end, art should be accessible to the public. Art that is successful should be able to reach and affect the masses ( hopefully in a positive way ), regardless of income.
I also wonder, if women artists are making nearly as much money as male artists, especially in the upper east side....only through research will I able to know the answer.
 |
| Enoc Perez at Acquavella |
 |
| John Currin at Gagosian |
 |
| Judith Bernstein at Alex Zachary |
 |
| Judith Bernstein |
 |
| Judith Bernstein |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)