Monday, 13 June 2011

Landscape; A Picture of Nothing

Landscape. Isn’t it all just nothing?

Although I’m moving away from focusing my work on Landscape, I still have a very emotive connection to it. But isn’t it all about nothing? The absence of anything?
I realised that my outcome was disappointing because it really was a picture of nothing. The space had depth but lacked any sort of atmosphere and the foreground objects seemed to create a boarder for an otherwise flat plane; too disjointed.



(Chichester Canal – JMW Turner)

Here is a great example, physically the focus point it in an area of comparative nothing, although there is the ship the main image is just open water. The surroundings have more in the name of ‘features’, but through clever techniques  make them dissolve out of view at first. However despite the lack of a physical object to ground the competition, it appears that there’s something completely different hold it all together.
For some reason It seems to be a lack of constraints, the colours fade into the background creating an almost eternal spectrum. In short it makes me feel free and alive.

I could quite happily spend a warm evening outside staring at the stars, and I do. Because there’s something highly therapeutic about these gripping atmospheres. It is transporting you to that place, in essence its very escapist.

Space is a very powerful force. I remember a member of my art history class had designed a piece of modernist architecture, and there was a space on the second story that resembled a balcony. When my lecturer asked the student what the space was for the student said that evidently he would use it to place a BBQ and reclining chair to relax in the evenings. When my lecturer then followed up his question with why is that your instinct with this space the student could not really answer but could provide the practical reasons associated like, being outside. However our understanding of space seems to be something very emotive. When you walk into a high ceilinged building there is usually some sense of a presence. It is possibly why this format of space has been adopted by religious institutions, to command a feeling of heavy air or awe. The same thing for me happens in this painting the space makes me feel in a certain way that a more claustrophobic environment would not. I believe this abstracted emotive connection is partly why I have been drawn to landscape. But I’m not going to make any general claims for the entire reason, I think that’s a little bit more complex for a blog post, mid revision anyway ;) 

Is art important to you?


I have been doing a lot of philosophical thinking lately I suppose. I have started many blog posts and they will be published after my exams (ending Wednesday wooo!) but I was revising and thought about how all my posts so far have been about art in its conventional forms; Painting, Photography, sculpture, film etc.
My last exam is on epic literature and I discovered that we need art. Although I have previously talked about why humanity decided to pick up two rocks and bang them together to make an interesting patter 40,000 years; I only described the effect of that action. It simply gave us the ability to think and challenge the world around us as we realized we can affect it.

But why??

I would consider epic literature as art, I would consider all literature as art; I would eve n consider games as art. All employ creative license and all have an intentional effect on an audience by one; or in some cases collective body of mindsets.



Today we would not function without art. Advertisement drives our increasingly globalized culture but it also drives us as individuals. How many people would say they could not cope without their gaming console? How many people look forward to going to the theatre? And how many people watch television?
The epic literature I have been reading has a diversity of aims, objectives and outcomes but one general theme is religion and the role of the mortals and the immortals. Humanity understood that they would one day die; but they aspired to immortality. However the immortality they aspired to is a abstracted immortality, such as being remembered by your descendants or your countrymen through statues, stories or rumor. Ancient Philosophy states that it is in fact in some instances preferable to be mortal than immortal. This is because with being immortal, those things that the mortals strive for become pointless. They lack the need for selflessness and rationality. As well as relationships and securing your legacy in your children; Cultural values so close to these people. They helped them secure their position in this world. Much how other religious imagery has impacted on cultures and people. But religion to many isn’t as important as it once was to ancestors.
Asserting cultural values still occurs today. The Film Milk illustrates this demonstrating the struggle many had to go through to be accepted as gay members of society. This type is designed to inspire us to think and challenge how we think. Or be a memorial for past views that now are alien and decadent. Fundamentally art can be entertaining and educative simultaneously. If these films weren't entertaining, would anyone watch them? Would anyone remember them?  appearing; reminding us of a social position. 


Despite this much art is there for entertainment or aesthetic. Many strive for a deeper statement to be resident but equally many do not. The power of art could be purely to allow us a release from the normal lives we need. Kick back and enjoy your evening. If you’re watching tv, a film, playing a game, reading a book, looking at a painting or through a magazine – Art is important to you.

Friday, 3 June 2011

How far is inovative technique, conforming to the convention?

My thought here is; is it actually impossible to be innovative in art? I want to point out this is just a quick post throwing out an idea that’s been floating through my head. Being Innovative isn’t necessarily an aim of art but the striving to create an memorable impression is – most of the time. Usually artists try to incorporate some sort of Avant-Guard element. But is this not conforming to a convention that’s been happening for centuries. I don’t think that this is a bad thing but it came to mind as I was thinking about my own art style. I have been thinking of how I can combine different mediums, I wanted to make it innovative but in my thought process I came to some ideas that had been lost in this want to create something new; it lacked the depth that my art at the moment has. My answer was to start experimenting as soon as exams are over; this, I’m looking forward to! But the convention of art is very interesting. I still stand by art itself can’t be confined to a specific convention but maybe the pattern of art movements can? Ah well this post wasn’t meant to be refined or concluded really. Sorry if it made no sense =)

Saturday, 14 May 2011

Today

I have changed my mind

Yay indecisiveness strikes again.



Looking back at my last post I have come to the conclusion that it I had to vote for one person it would be Hillary Lloyd. After so much thought I realised that I feel her work is the most innovative and progressive and it’s really got me thinking about my own work (Although Shaw has influenced me too). She embraces something that’s inherently modern and that gives it a spark that won my hypothetical support.


This got me thinking of art today, what my art could do in the future. Lloyd embraces technological changes and although I use photography within my work I feel that, for the greater part, I do not. There are stereotypical projections of the future yet it is impossible to state what might actually happen. Art being influenced by all kinds of social and political outlets therefore is almost volatile.

I want to do something with my work, I have a number of ideas and hope to explore them as soon as my exams are oven and then I will probably be uploading pictures as things progress.

Although technological advances are important man seems to have no jurisdiction over the power of nature, this year alone there have been numerous natural disasters and this elemental force still seems vastly unknown. I feel that this focus on nature is important. I feel that my landscape painting is becoming more elemental orientated; although I still focus on moisture light diffusion and clear aspects of how we see the world around us, I have now also began to think of wind and other invisible forces that help us to translate our environments.

Im looking forward to the experimentation ;)

Friday, 6 May 2011

The Turner Prize 2011

I'm so excited!!
This year the short-listed nominations are a great range and i want to talk about them a little.


George Shaw 

I'm a little bit biased towards George Shaw as I have just today completed my exam and he was a tremendous influence. Although on the face of it I would love for him to win I will explain my internal dilemma later. Shaw is an painter who usually uses enamel on board. His images are representative and always retain an heir of lifelessness to them. The absence of human presence draws you in to connect with the surroundings more potently and this is definitely an eerie setting. "Poets Day" by George Shaw.


Hillary Lloyd

Lloyd is an Installation artist, building her work around technological medium like film, video and photography. The environment she chooses tend to be clinical, voids of minimalist space that seems to become somewhat overbearing and heavy. For me the work feels threatening, possible a comment on mortality?

The above piece is very striking, it at first reminded me of a alien from Dr. Who. The confined corridor points directly at you the viewer as it the medium is watching you instead of the other way around. It definitely has  a very heavy presence that grabs you.


Karla Black

Is a the youngest nominations this year, her scultpures typicaly consist of domestic and tactile substances. Flour, Vaseline, thread and lip gloss in the above piece. This piece seems to be directly contrasted to the work of Lloyd. The piece takes a very passive position and almost looks comforting. The pastel colours and the flowing material resemble soft pillows; something that, although suspended from the ceiling, feels entirely inviting and familiar. However i then discovered that the main material is quite plasticy; this then felt a little more sinister but something that still remained delicate. It felt more anatomical, but I can't really place it.

According to her there needs to be some kind of physical struggle for her work to be created and that the work is specifically relevant to that environment, before it is destroyed. 


Martin Boyce

Boyce is a sculptor, and said to be the best-known out of this years short-list.

His works are somewhat hostile, consisting of geometric forms jutting out of otherwise tranquil spaces and "might be described as playground climbing frames designed to poke a child’s eye out". They are dark and theatrical with a hint of what has been described as 'male egotism' in art. The need for something so secondarily violent to its pre innocent state. They challenge their own environment. This piece above reminded me of the bare springs of an old bed, the spikes upon them strikingly uncomfortable and subtly chilling until the great black mass of threateningly jutting black metal above sinks into sight. The image is impression is threatening to the viewer and seems to be the most sinister this year.

My Opinion

In complete honesty I wouldn't feel let down if any of these artists won this year but personally if I had to choose id be stuck with a very difficult task. Although George Shaw is a great influence of mine, I think his work really speaks to a modern audience but one that seems to be possessed by this need to define what a painting can be. Something that Shaw relatively conforms to. Therefore maybe its more suitable to choose something more striking. Shaw is the first representational artist ever in the turner prize, others that might be deemed as such fall into other movements. But at the same time is that a justification for a vote? Boyce, Black and Lloyd's work are all exciting to me. Boyce's work I liked because of the process of learning about the subject that you go on. As you contemplate it, it grows ever more sinister. Blacks work really got me thinking about less conventional medium; she pushes notions of art to the limit and this I think is profoundly suitable for the Turner Prize. Lloyd's work embraces digital medium and a harrowing of human frealty which I found particularly emotive. Blacks stands out as the most optimistic of the selection as Shaws work also retains a sense of foreboding both in palette choice as the composition remains very heavy and cool but also because of the blatant red splatters on the wall.

I think my hypothetical vote would go to: Boyce of Shaw. I think I need to think about it a little but ill update this post soon.




Medium

There is evidently a conventional sense of art "art".
Whether this be a photo, painting or sculpture these seem to remain the known of art mediums and I realise that so far I have talked about the painting side way too much! There are so many additional types; architecture, advertisement  graphic art, installation, textiles, fashion, screen printing, mono printing, illustration and so on.  

But I wanted to talk about something else; Land Art.


Nancy Holt believes that the world around us is full of so much artistic potential and overlooked by the masses. Her Sun Tunnels in the Nevada Desert are strategically placed to capture and frame the surrounding landscape, in turn forcing the viewer (or explorer) to make the art themselves as they are in controll of the artistic experience. When an artist chooses to portray something in their medium they don't set out to make something antithetically pleasing necessarily; but to embody a comment or statement on something more philosophical or emotional. I love the concept behind these tunnels and I do fee that I'm constantly in art mode when I'm outside; be that city or country. I remember walking with my boyfriend and I started day dreaming about some colours bouncing off of a tree onto a house. He saw me staring and asked.. I doubt he will ask again but the image of his confused face will stay with me for a while hehe.  

I'm not usually annoyed by artistic opinion but when people feel the need to impose regulation onto work then it bugs me. Just like how some people amuse a pretty picture means its a successful one. <rant over>

Nancy's Husband was also a land artist and he created the mysterious Spiral Jetty.

The reason I say mysterious is because it was made at a time of drought and evidently the water rose again concealing it but in recent years it has cropped up once more above the reef. There is a moral debate about this sculpture; many wish to remove it from its current location and place it in exhibition, but I feel that it will then loose the essence of itself. I think the fact that it is subject t nature is romantic in a way. As art develops so will it in its own way so seems to be an eternal canvas for nature.

This morning when i was standing at the bus stop I turned to the bush beside me and there was  already bug. Complimented by the deep green leaves it was sat on, it looked glorious in the morning sunlight. Then I looked to the left and saw another, to then discover that the bush was covered in them. It was brilliant and reminded me that nature has so much to offer us in the universe of art, its fuelled thousands creative thoughts for generations and I believe it does even today have a tremendous impact on our lives. Whether this be through subliminal means or blatant designs. 

Thursday, 5 May 2011

Art is...

Art is an opinion
I’m definitely not the subtlest writer so mine probably shines through - nay blinds you - from time to time. I feel the real fascination lies with the inevitability of it. Art will always progress in some form of another. But an opinion is under the ownership of someone, so here's me.
 *cheesy photo warning*


I have had a little bit of an odd week; but one that's drawn me to a conclusion. 'Art' in the sense that I'm talking about seems to be more of a way of life than an interest, but I don’t think I’m definable by it. Hardly any of the people close to me share this passion and so my art world is a very personal thing. I may have spent years focusing on landscape but I’m ready for a challenge.

I’m setting myself a project!

After my exams I’m going to compose a painting that symbolises me. I’m going to attempt the dreaded self portrait! I think I’m going to need months to sketch and work something out which is why I’m giving myself so long to do this but I want to do it well.
Art to many like Andy Warhol isn’t about some spiritual enlightenment it’s about a personal interest. He stated that being an artist is a job, not unlike any other skill based profession, despite all of its romanticism.

I’m going to embrace the selfishness of art and let the inner child in me come out. I think that I need to just enjoy making something again, and to release all these predetermined rules about aesthetics and form. I’m going to push myself, it could drive me mad but that doesn’t matter because you whoever you are the lucky one on the journey with me.