5/5/08

Ch 6,7,& conclusion:

Freeland asks if "we can look at art simply for enjoyment?".  It seems as if we have thoroughly discussed this over the course of this semester.  I feel that it is up to the viewer on how they view the art.  Sure, the viewer might benefit more by looking into the background of the worker but not everyone will look into it.  Later on, the discussion of whether art going digital is good.  I guess it is good and at the same time its not but regardless it is going to happen.  Digitalizing art does potentially take away a person's desire to see it in person but it also gives the art work more exposure which is always good.  

 Questions:

I personally am all for digital art but was wondering how a majority of the older artists feel who did not grow up with computers. 

4/30

I still can't believe women are not getting the recognition they deserved.  I have always thought that sexism and racism was way over but I guess not?  The fact that only 5 percent of the art in the Met is female but 85 percent of the nudes are female is terrible.  Hopefully this will change in the future.  

Questions:

Do all museums have around same statistics as the Met?  

4/28

In this reading, Freeland discusses museums.  Freeland points out how museums usually have a target audience.  Not everyone has the same taste in art so it makes sense that there is a vast variety of museums to go to.  Freeland then discuess how Bourdieu studied the relationship between class and taste in art.  He claims that people of a lower economic class tend to not like classical stuff as much.  I don't want to agree with stereotypes really, but I can see how he came to this conclusion.  Lastly, he talks about the relationship of money and museums.  I have always assumed this.  Without money, an industry really can't survive.  

 

4/23

Dewey speaks about how you should not look at the history of an art piece while looking at art.  It creates a bias that could possibly effect how you view the work.  Freeland disagrees with Dewey's philosphy.  He claims that by knowing the background of the work, it helps open up different ways of viewing the work.  It also helps you notice symbolism in the work.  

4/21

Shvarts artwork was clearly going to offend some people because of the fact that it deals with miscarriages. After reading about this it makes me think that everyone is going to have in opinion of your work. Some will like it and some won't so you might as well try and not listen to the opinions.

Also: check out this link.
I saw this exhibit at the moment and thought it was worth while to check out.
http://graffitiresearchlab.com/?page_id=76

4/16

Micheal Foucault talks about the relationship between the artist and there work. He explains the significance of the work to the artist. Micheal Baxandall also speaks about interpretation. He talks about how the observer has a different view of the object than the creator. I was just thinking about this today as I was looking at other peoples work online. I was wondering if they view there work the same as I do which made me think about others viewing my work differently than I would. This raises the question of "Is what is good to you, good to others?" I guess that question is good to wonder because it causes you to question your work more.

4/14

Kant speaks about how genius(art) is rare. According to Kant, you cannot pass on being a genius or even learn it. It sort of defeats the purpose of education but I do believe this. Some of the best artists/designers have no formal art education. Of course, getting a formal education is very beneficial, it is just that some(the genius's) don't necessarily need it.

Nochlin speaks about how the women's past is a reason why there were not many famous women artists. I sort of agree with this and dislike how it is true.