On Painting with Words
Saturday, December 11, 2010
Gustav Klimt
Sublime?
As my paper progressed, I decided to compare the way that artists depict the sky, and to find a way to determine which depictions could be considered sublime, if not all of them. Along with works by Turner and Friedrich, which I find to be very sublime, I looked closely at the work of Maxfield Parrish.
Haruki Murakami
IMAGES
Fragonard, The Swing, 1776
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/eb/Fragonard%2C_The_Swing.jpg
Degas, The Tub, 1886
http://www.musee-orsay.fr/en/collections/works-in-focus/graphic-arts.html?no_cache=1&zoom=1&tx_damzoom_pi1[showUid]=4041
Degas Sketchhttp://johnnyholland.org/wp-content/uploads/edgar.jpg
Chuck Close, Fanny, 1985Robert Ryman, Ledger, 1982
http://www.tate.org.uk/servlet/ViewWork?workid=13058&tabview=image
Let's Play Baseball
Essay Revisited
I explored the idea of secrets and curiosity scientifically, and found every article basically saying that our curiosity is innate. The more I thought about it, the more mystery because my fascination. We get so preoccupied with mystery, sucked in to books like Harry Potter and The Da Vinci Code. From there, I extrapolated to the idea of art, curious as to why I'm so attracted to some and not to others. Why, when there are many individuals who can precisely replicate a scene photo-realistically with paint, are the artists in the museums people like Rothko and Ryman; more importantly, why do I like Ryman so much more than a photo-realistic oil paint landscape. The answer is mystery. Mystery is ultimately what is most attractive about art and, ultimately, about life. We play hard to get, we research new fields, we step into the shoes of another through community service or acting or psyche. Furthermore, our ability to harness our curiosity further than food and shelter seeking is what makes humans unique.
So I explored the different kinds of mystery in art from Fragonard, to Degas, to Chuck Close, to Robert Ryman. I then looked at the Frost poem "The Road Less Traveled" as suggested, and actually related it back to the good and bad children's books I originally took in for that class.
EVERYONE BE CURIOUS ABOUT LIFE. Life is too short to sit around allowing things to happen to us; we must seize every day and learn something new!
Yah! Happy Holidays
PS. Images in the next post
on the topic of illustrations...
Friday, December 10, 2010
Illustrating poems
I decided to do my paper on the combination of poems and illustrations. I think that this is a unique approach to painting with words because poems can be expanded in two directions: first, poems are meant to be read aloud (excluding concrete poems), as well as read silently. Reading poems aloud adds to their effect. Second, poems can be augmented with illustrations. This expands on their visual aspect, not only the length of lines and quality of words, but also the visual images that the poems present.
William Blake's poems are interesting to look at, because he was an artist as well as a writer. Here's one of his poems from Song of Innocence and Experience, called "The Tyger." Here, his illustrations enhance the poem because they add to the general dark mood, with the red-eyed tiger, sharp, thin branches, and dim colors.
When interpreting someone else's poems, the process is different. What would you suggest as a strategy for doing this?
different approaches to using ruins
I found this bottom painting also by Hubert Robert called "Imaginary View of the Grande Galerie in the Louvre in Ruins." It makes me wonder what the effect of showing such a prominent building in ruins has. Robert's piece contrasts sharply with the top one, by Giovanni Battista Piranesi, called "Ancient crossroads of the via Appia and the via Ardeatina." While Piranesi seems to emphasize the great detail of the ruins and their towering magnificence, Robert instead uses them to create a mood of mystery and sublime melancholy. His building fades away into the haze of the distance, while Piranesi's stays distinct and clear. Also, in Robert's piece, the people and the foreground have more importance than the people in Piranesi's peice do. In his, the clutter of the architecture overpowers the people in it.
Comments
1. A Secret- Lil' G
Secrets... that's a really interesting way to look at how/why we interact with words and images. But I think enlightenment and sense of belonging are not always essential to appreciating a painting or a poem. Sometimes, they leave me completely confused (Rothko's color field paintings, for instance) but that doesn't prevent me from enjoying those works. I think a painting does offer more than words because it's immediate. Whereas we have to process and at least try to understand a written work, we tend to react more immediately to a painting based on its aesthetic cues. Between creating an image for writing and vise versa, I don't really prefer either one; I think we do both at the same time. Writers/poets don't share the entire secret and we often times have to fill in the gaps ourselves (i.e. create a story, or at least, narrative details). Similarly, I think we "create an image" when we look at one. For instance, people see different things in a cloud (carrot, rocket, fish, etc.). Even if the image is a more concrete painting, I think we notice different things and essentially see a different painting based on our biases/interests/preferences/etc.
2. Video to Text Comparison - Kyra
Wow! It's vastly different from what I thought it would be. I read the text version with a different pace and understanding of the tone. But one of the major differences between the two that most struck me was volume. Unless it's a movie script, writers don't tell us how to read their text, but volume in the performance really added to the meaning of the poem. There's a difference between "What do you want?" and "What do you want?". Similarly, performance italicized parts of the poem and highlighted the poet's attitude, which due to this poem's subject matter, was especially important to understand. The performance didn't necessarily change the meaning of the poem, but did add to my interpretation of it because it was more direct.
Although this doesn't really fall within the scope of your paper, I thought it might be interesting to consider an additional category. In addition to poem vs. poem + performance there's poem + music (i.e. hip-hop/rap) which is pretty distinctive from the other two.
Here's an example of poem + music:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACg8T5eliTE&feature=related
(words being around 1:15)
Not every song has a "poetic" feel to it but what makes a poem a poem is like discussing the definition of "painterly" so we'll save that for later :p.
And lyrics (or the poem):
All causes and all effects.
No college shit necessary to acknowledge it.
Some call it love and some call it sex. Opposites.
Call it what you want, but with one touch and you’re gone, so call in sick.
Human politics, from whispered hushes and distant crushes.
Mental fits breakin’ pencil tips and inkin’ brushes.
Simple rushes.
God makes man, and this is the devil’s finishing touches.
From dukes to duchesses and kings to queens.
From dust to dust, this is the sinful theme.
The scene for crack fiends and gun-packin’ teens
High on vaccines, magazines and saccharine.
From dukes to duchesses and kings to queens.
From dust to dust, this is the sinful theme.
The scene for crack fiends and gun-packin’ teens
High on vaccines, magazines and saccharine.
Lovescream.
Surrealism
"Still it would be marvelous
to terrify a law clerk with a cut lily,
or kill a nun with a blow on the ear.
It would be great
to go through the streets with a green knife
letting out yells until I died of the cold."
--Neruda
Walking Around
vs
Do you get a similar mood from this:
"There are sulphur-colored birds, and hideous intestines
hanging over the doors of houses that I hate,
and there are false teeth forgotten in a coffeepot,
there are mirrors
that ought to have wept from shame and terror,
there are umbrellas everywhere, and venoms, and umbilical
cords."
-- Neruda
Surrealism in Children's books
Vs.
Could you find this in an art gallery?
Assuming you don't know where it's from, would you be surprised to find the above work in an art gallery? What about this:
Personally, I think I might be more surprised by the latter than the former; the first reminds me of the artwork of the Harlem Renaissance. However it's the latter work of art, a piece by Cy Twombly entitled Souvenir that is more likely to receive attention as a work of art than the former, an illustration from Ezra Jack Keats' children's book, The Snowy Day. For my paper, I'm exploring the distinction between children's book illustrations and other forms of art, including why we generally don't value illustrations as works of art separate of their place in children's literature. I compared Keats' illustration to a Cy Twombly piece in particular because to me it seems reminiscent of something that a child could create (which is not to demean its artistic value), and I find it curious that particularly in the realm of modernism, we can place more value on art that can be likened to that created by a child than on that created for a child. Children's book illustrations serve a unique purpose in supporting the development of a child's mind, but given the beauty and innovation of some of those illustrations I don't think that they should be limited to that purpose. What are your thoughts?
Video to Text Comparison
Music & Painting
Color is the keyboard, the eyes are the harmonies, the soul is the piano with many strings. The artist is the hand that plays, touching one key or another, to cause vibrations in the soul.He supposedly saw color when he heard music. Not everyone's a synesthesiac, but I think there's value in understanding the relationship between color and music. I've doodled before with a song in mind, letting that song take over my hand. You may be familiar with the Windows Media Player visualization in which random bars or waves are generated based on the song you're listening to. *Questions* How do painters use color to add sound to their painting? Do you think this is effective? Between painting and writing, which is more effective for describing music? What elements would you emphasize if you were to paint a sound?
Silence in Painting
A writer can use devices like auditory imagery or alliteration (especially if spoken) to describe a sound. While the writer has the advantage of referring to a sound that already exists in reader's memory and prompt the reader to retrieve and play that sound, a painter lacks the kind of auditory, figurative language of a writer. But this doesn't stop them from attempting to visually describe a sound. Munch actually turns his medium's weakness -its silence- to accentuate his point. *Questions* How would you paint a "scream" (or any other sound)? How is sound described in painting vs. writing? Which one do you think is more effective and why?
the mood embodied by the aesthetics of ruins in paintings
Hi guys, I wanted to investigate what effect ruins have in painting. These two paintings ( the top one is called "View of Gothic Chapel in Ruins" by Carl Georg Adolph Hasenpflug; the bottom one is "Architectural Landscape with Canal" by Hubert Robert). It's clear that both these paintings have a distinct atmosphere, and the ruins play an important role in creating this mood. I get a strong feeling of decay and impermanence, but yet I also feel there is a sense of strength conveyed by the stones. There's also a feeling of the sublime, like there's this awesome construction from another time, and the painter's compositions, specifically the placement of the ruins, demonstrates this. I feel there is also an interesting contrast between the architectural and natural imagery in the paintings.
Thursday, December 9, 2010
role of the artist in Bartleby
Capturing Loneliness
Style Differences
For my paper, I was looking over various articles about the importance of color in illustration, and found these quotes that you might find interesting:
"It is not the form that dictates the color, but the color that brings out the form."
-Hans Hofmann
"The color of the object illuminated partakes of the color of that which illuminates it."
-Leonardo da Vinci
These quotes got me thinking, and I began wondering about the essence of illustration; is it the form (the artistic style-i.e. collage) or the use of color that make a lasting impression? Which method is more effective for the sake of creating childrens' books? Art in general?
The pictures attached are a black and white sketch of a peacock by an anonymous artist and a peacock by Eric Carle. Both pictures illustrate the same thing. Which picture is your favorite and why? What roles do style and color play in your decision?
Illustrators' Images
The Written Spoken Word
As someone who attempts to be somewhat knowledgeable about spoken word poetry, I've often wondered exactly what its true purpose is and what makes it so different from written poetry--if it is different at all, that is. Since spoken word poetry is meant to performed rather than read on a page, I decided to focus my paper on whether or not it should ever be written down for an audience to read.
Take for instance this transcription* of a spoken word piece (I will post the video later for your comparison, but first, just read this):
Is it really possible to get the true meaning of what the speaker/author is trying to say from just looking at this transcription? Yes, these are the same words being said, but I feel that the performance aspect introduces the reader to a new level of understanding. The video will be coming soon!
*I did this transcription myself after watching the youtube video many times. There are a few words I couldn't understand. They are indicated by: [?]
Illustrators
Both Carle and Keats use a type of collage style to make their artwork, resulting in unique, memorable illustrations that have won both Carle and Keats multiple honors and awards. Here are two of my favorite pictures by both of them; the first is from Carle's 10 Little Rubber Ducks, and the second is from Keats' The Snowy Day. What do you guys think? Do you prefer collage-style illustrations to say, drawings? Paintings? If so, why? Why not? Or do you think choice of medium is not important when it comes to effectiveness of illustration?
Style
Clearly, not all paintings are delightful little scenes of sunflowers and sailboats, but I think there is a difference between unpleasant subject matter and art that is actually ugly. Many paintings about torture, death, and other unpleasant subjects are quite graceful:
Now compare it to the Baselitz in my first post. To me, beauty is not so much a matter of subject but of style.
My question is, why would an artist or writer intentionally create something ugly?
Ugly
Curly Head, Georg Baselitz, 1967
The Baselitz (above) is hanging in Harvard's Sackler museum, and every time I go in (which somehow seems to be a lot,) I can't help staring at it. It's just so disconcerting. The fractured, disproportionate figure is painted in ruddy flesh and mud tones, with some blood reds at the top (which you might not be able to see in this photograph.) It's crudely done, with inch-thick brush strokes and sketchy, unfinished edges. There is a heaviness to the painting, with its crowded, confused background/figure and dulled hues. At the bottom, the tree trunk and fat, puffy feet are painted with the same palette, suggesting almost a conflation of person and environment. There's also a face at the right (which could be a human, or possibly a tiger?) that adds a sense of danger to the painting, with its shifted eyes and shadowing.
Now read this (amazing) poem by Seamus Heaney.
Death of a Naturalist
All the year the flax-dam festered in the heart
Of the townland; green and heavy headed
Flax had rotted there, weighted down by huge sods.
Daily it sweltered in the punishing sun.
Bubbles gargled delicately, bluebottles
Wove a strong gauze of sound around the smell.
There were dragon-flies, spotted butterflies,
But best of all was the warm thick slobber
Of frogspawn that grew like clotted water
In the shade of the banks. Here, every spring
I would fill jampots full of the jellied
Specks to range on the window-sills at home,
On shelves at school, and wait and watch until
The fattening dots burst into nimble-
Swimming tadpoles. Miss Walls would tell us how
The daddy frog was called a bullfrog
And how he croaked and how the mammy frog
Laid hundreds of little eggs and this was
Frogspawn. You could tell the weather by frogs too
For they were yellow in the sun and brown
In rain.
Then one hot day when fields were rank
With cowdung in the grass the angry frogs
Invaded the flax-dam; I ducked through hedges
To a coarse croaking that I had not heard
Before. The air was thick with a bass chorus.
Right down the dam gross-bellied frogs were cocked
On sods; their loose necks pulsed like snails. Some hopped:
The slap and plop were obscene threats. Some sat
Poised like mud grenades, their blunt heads farting.
I sickened, turned, and ran. The great slime kings
Were gathered there for vengeance and I knew
That if I dipped my hand the spawn would clutch it.
To me, this conjures some of the same feelings as Baselitz's piece. Heaney's language is so rich, yet that richness is achieved through rotting flax, "rank" cow dung, "warm thick slobber / Of frogspawn" and "blunt heads farting." I love this poem-- the intensity of the language; the way it perfectly reflects what it's describing. We are as revolted as the narrator, and I don't know about you, but the last line makes my stomach clench a little. Really, though, would it be truthful to write a pretty poem about frogspawn?
Questions: Does anyone have ideas about what Baselitz is trying to achieve with "Curly Head?"
Also, does anyone have any suggestions for other paintings/poems with similarly "ugly" approaches to their subject matter?
The Sublime
Over the course of this semester, the concept of the sublime has cropped up on more than one occasion in my various classes. I'd never before fully understood what the term meant, especially as it pertained to art, so I decided to investigate. The understanding that I came away with was that the sublime is a depiction of a vast greatness and magnitude that cannot be calculated, explained, or compared.
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
What to use?
This piece is done by finger prints with pencil. I think there is something amazing about the organic nature of it. there was nothing in between him and the canvas - no brush or pen in the way. I think it speaks to him and to her. I can create a life story for this woman that might be all wrong, but who knows?
I love this piece because it's a glace at this dancer privately stretching for herself. she has a whole story of performance, of passion. I get a view into it and can create her entire life story - understand it for a moment...but perhaps I've got it all wrong. Does that take away from it?
quotations from To the Lighthouse:
“All these were so coloured and distinguished in his mind that he had already his private code, his secret language, though he appeared the image of stark and uncompromising severity, with his high forehead and his fierce blue eyes, impeccably candid and pure, frowning slightly at the sight of human frailty” (3-4).
“When she looked in the glass and saw her hair grey, her cheek sunk, at fifty, she thought, possibly she might have managed things better—her husband; money; his books. But for her own part she would never for a single second regret her decision, evade difficulties, or slur over duties” (6).
QUESTION: Is there an image or a description in a book (including To the Lighthouse) that stood out to you? that makes you create an image or a story?
What about when a book - in which the story is given, and then you create the images - is made into a movie? When you saw Harry Potter for the first time after reading the book, were the images like what you had imagined? Did it take away from the books or make it better? Wasn't it difficult to then picture anything beside Daniel Radcliffe when you turned to the new books after seeing the movie? why? !!
A Secret
I'm exploring this idea and how it relates to words and images. Can a description of someone or something let us in on a secret better than a painting or visa versa? Do we like knowing the whole story or do we like inventing some of it? Can a portrait tell more about a person than a description of her? Why do we instinctively like this voyeuristic view? This private scene?
Every person has so much to him or her. Every moment of our lives that we share with someone, that we keep to ourselves, every fall, every cry, every laugh, every memory. We each have our own and so many of them. Can a painting shed light upon all that, or could writing do so better? Which gives more? Which is more satisfying and why?
QUESTION: what do you think? Does a painting offer more than words can? Is a picture worth 1000 words? If so, why? Which do you prefer, reading something and creating an image (or movie) in your mind from it, OR looking at a picture/painting and creating a story for it?
Graffiti as Cultural Preservation
Graffiti is “not for normal everyday people, its for the certain set of people....You’re not doing it for other people on the street. You’re doing it for yourself and you’re doing it for others, because unless you’re a writer, at the end of the day, you can’t even begin to appreciate or understand it” (Macdonald, 157).
There is a sense of exclusivity that naturally comes with graffiti. To be a graffiti writer is to be one of the "elite", a person that is privileged enough to appreciate both the aesthetic and literary qualities of graffiti. In a sense, this exclusivity juxtaposes (from a writer's perspective) "us" against "them". It creates a sort of tension.
"A Chicano kid grows up with walls of many kinds around him. When somebody is born into that situation there are several things he can do. He can ignore the walls, and sink into apathy. Or he can become violent and try to blow up the walls. But there is a third way. And that is to perform a kind of ritual magic to neutralize the force of the walls by decorating them with signs, symbols and art....graffiti is their way of saying 'I am', 'We are.' (Cessareti)
This tension can then foster a sense of community. Graffiti writers identify space as a commodity. By "bombing", they aggressively reclaim space that was taken by corporate America. When taken into the context of cultural preservation, looking specifically at the Chicano movement of East Los Angeles, graffiti is used to create a sense of community, a sense of belonging. By incorporating images iconic of the Chicano culture, graffiti writers are superimposing their own cultural identities, the Chicano identity, onto physical space. With the construction of highways that intersect barrios, thereby ultimately botching them, graffiti serves as an adhesive to rebound the damaged community.
Question: Do the violent implications of graffiti overshadow its cultural significance? As pertaining to the group of "them", can outsiders ever come to appreciate the deeper significance of graffiti, not simply its superficial, commercialized face (i.e. the OBEY brand)?
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Dual Levels of Comprehension, the Exclusivity of Graffiti
“The whole art form is based upon lettering...[breaking it] from its classical form. You don’t want to lose the basis of the letter, but you want to lose the letter.” --Bomb It (documentary)
Possible thesis: the marriage of literary and visual elements in urban graffiti creates a dual level of comprehension, the visual for the masses and the literary for the selected.
A few weeks ago, we discussed the idea of a letter, or rather a word, transcending its literary purpose and serving an artful purpose. In my essay, I will try to analyze the literary and visual elements of graffiti in order to create distinctions between its audiences. It is true that graffiti has become a sort of main stream urban culture, but what's happening at the street level? For most people, the literary aspect of graffiti has been lost. Instead, they are left with visually stimulating pieces. But on a street level, at a deeply urban, inner-city, and even personal level, the words carry meaning. Not only do they transcend their "classical form" to express the artists individuality, but they create exclusivity. The artist prepares his piece so that he can filter his audience.
“The only thing you have is your name. You have to defend it.” --Bomb It (documentary)
The artist, or rather "Graffiti Writer", makes his tag--his personalized stamp, his own trademark--difficult to read so that he can preserve his own identity amidst mass consumption and forced advertisement. "The rituals revolve around making a place for one's self on the streets and helping create a sense of belonging in an indifferent environment" (Romotsky, Los Angeles Barrio Calligraphy). Graffiti is the writers way of simply saying that he exists.
My question to you is: is graffiti an effective way of preserving one's identity?
An Idea for YOU! (if you've waited this late!) =#
What I'm writing about!
So, basically I decided to take on what we did the very last week of class--I know I already had another idea that I thought I was going to do then, but I got really inspired by our work together in class and thought I could write a paper over it! Basically, I'm taking some of the concrete poems we worked with in class and creating a useable theorem to decipher between which of these are "artful" or not. "Artful," a term much like painterly--don't even get me started on that!--is defined to the best of my abilities in the essay, but my question to you guys is: What do you think? Which of these fit with YOUR definition of art? It's a really interesting idea, I think, and I'd be even more interested in seeing if my classifications fit with yours or if what our ideas about what "art" is are different! Here's some concrete poems (I basicallly used the ones we talked about in class)! Actually, it won't let me add another picture, so what I'll do is just make new posts with links!
I thought working with this type of expression was very appropriate, seeing as how the course's name is "Painting with WORDS!"
[Update from PFP: James's links, coming to you live:
- James's 2nd link: Il Pleut (It Rains)
- James's 3rd link: Apfel
Check the sidebar for tips on posting pictures and creating live links.]