Final Project Research Pt. 1

Over thanksgiving break I thought alot what I wanted the theme of my piece to be and what kind of elements/objects I want to take place in it. I decided to relate it to the holocaust and mainly the horrible emotions that were felt and have taken place in concentration camps. So I visited my Grandfather who lives about 45 minutes away, he is a World War 2 veteran. Also he was one of the first squadrons to clear out some of the concentration camps that they overtook from the germans. While I was there he talked about what it was like in those areas and the stuff that he saw, it really is moving the horrid acts that he witnessed taking place. My Grandfather also wrote me a description of everything that he could remember when the raided the camps. I have that information to help me refrence my drawing toward. So far my idea is to have the main focal point of a weak/malnourished man on the ground getting dragged towards darkness by his feet. But the I want to the piece to be mostly a dark black color but I want the background to be lit up by maybe fire chambers. I definetly need to think of some more objects to include in the foreground and the background to make an intresting composition.

Quote Response

I would have to say that I do not fully agree or disagree with this particular quote. There are some parts of what Lawrence Weiner said that I cannot get my head all the way around or try to understand where he was getting that idea from. When he states that "The point is, that every piece of art changes your whole perception of the rest of the world for the rest of your life. " Is where I have very mixed feelings about this quote. I do agree that when you view a piece of art that it can actually change your life forever. Although I have to say that the change that it creates is not a drastic one but more of one that unconsciously alters your outlook and certain schema's about things. As in a change that you really cant feel you see or even one you do not even know happened, but it is there. I am not sure about the part of the quote where he states that a piece of art work can alter your perception of the rest of the world. 
I do not agree with that, in my opinion there is no way that anything could change all of that without what you were looking at was completely life changing. Everything you would probably see after that inspiring piece will just not live up to the one that moved you in the first place. So that is why I cannot agree that every piece of "art" moves you and changes your perception about things. Only a piece that triggers a past memory or strong feeling is the only thing that can do that. Not any old piece of art. Although in the second part of his statement from "Between Artists" he then states that if does not change your perception then the piece should not be considered art. He then went on to call it a commodity as in something for your well-being not an endowing piece. 
"And it's not a joke! And if it doesn't, then it's not art, it's a commodity." This is his second part of the statement that follows the first part. I find this part of the quote very controversial and I cannot see how he gets this idea into his head in the first place. I think this a very generalized statement to say and I do not think that every work of art can be squeezed to fit into that category. Every work of art was created in a different way for a particular reason not just to move somebody. For example an artist may do a project that encompasses the way he feels about a certain subject. He is not creating it to change a person's view of the world but rather too express his built up feelings. So that is why I cannot agree with Lawrence Weiner when it comes to that part. To create something that would change the viewers entire perception is an incredibly difficult task to accomplish. A lot of thought and time needs to be put into your work to even come close to completing something that would fulfill those requirements. 

I am somewhat angered by the fact of him stating that if it does not complete its task of moving the viewer than it should be labeled as a commodity and not a work of art. In my opinion that is a very ignorant generalization to make. Labeling something as a commodity basically means that it does not live up to the present standards of today's art and is than is something related to that of an eyesore. Compared to what is fit into today's view of art is a wide range of unique pieces that definitely express our generations view on this topic. All in all I would have to say that there are certain elements that I can thoroughly agree with and definitely understand where he was coming from also what point he was trying to convey by saying them. I still have mixed feelings about this and I would have to say that I cannot be on his side with that quote, I am one who would fight against these kinds of outrageous topics. 

Model Drawing

This is the drawing that I worked on for about three hours or less during drawing. I chose to really have a cropped view of the model. This model had a very interesting body shape....

Book/Model Re-do Project

This time we had to re-do the same project but with as many pages as we wanted. Instead of the required 25.

Book/Model Drawing Project

For this assignment we had to chose a book and draw on 25 pages. Those drawings had to be from observation. Then we had to draw a model over the taped pages. Finally I taped masking tape over the negative space. Thus creating my final piece.

My thoughts about Persona

I really came up with my own stereotype for this movie just based off the couple of abstract slides that were coming across the screen in the first couple of minutes. But after fully completing watching the movie without falling asleep, I came to conclusion that it was nothing like I had expected. I would not even class this a film, I would call it a work off art. Just by lightly watching it you can see all the thought that went into each shot, where every light was placed and even the positions of the actors. Everything was thought out perfectly, just like how a work of art should be. Thats why I would consider this a different genre of film.
After just watching this creation for the first time you can see how the director used a repeating effect of contrast. Using not only the whitest of whites but the blackest of black. This effect really brings the viewers eye in and keeps them focused on the movie. It really hooks you in and keeps you interested in what will happen next. This is by the effect of abstractism that the director used. By not explaining every detail and leaving some things open to interpretation. Also to always keep them guessing of what will happen next or what exactly did that certain thing mean.
Besides those two techniques there is another one that is also present and that is symbolism. You can slightly see the use of this slowly and faintly all throughout the film. As it nears the end, the more appearant it becomes. For example at one point in the movie you can see the two female faces of the main characters become one. Just by splitting each face in half and connecting them the director can tell a message without using a words or dialouge. He has achieved this in most of the movie.
In my opinion the repetition of certain objects such as the cigarettes, sunglasses and the light vs dark are all connected. He repeats all of these certain things because they all pertain to the story line. Although the connection is not directly noticed but It is there. The glasses may represent identity and the cigarettes could represent their life and how quickly it is coming to an end. These may not be the correct representations but they are what my idea is of them. I think that is one of the reasons why the director made the movie in the such a way that he did. To leave every single part of this movie up to the viewers interpretation.
After watching this film, I have to came to the conclusion that this film is a metaphor for something greater rather than its direct meaning. I think that the way each scene is filmed stands for something else other than it actually pertaining to the story line. I think that this film is about life and losing your sanity, this statement can be proved just by following the movie. For example the further you go in to the film, the more insane the nurse becomes. She soon starts have huge emotional drops and highs, even having intense breakdowns. Contrary to the start of the movie where she is the sane and calm one whilst her patient is the one going through those emotions. As anyone can see that their roles have dramatically changed and almost switched places with each other.
I think Bergman’s view of the art in this film was to create something that was there when you actually dug and searched for it. But can be hidden if you just watch the film lightly and just for enjoyment. This creates a sense of mystery for the first time viewer and by the way the story line was layed out. It will keep the watcher coming back for seconds to try and figure out whatever parts that Bergman has left open for them to solve on their own. He also did this so that each person can get their own feelings and thoughts on this movie by reading it differently. So that no two thoughts on this movie are exactly the same and can deeply vary from one another.

3x3 Still Life

In this drawing are my roommates hats. He loves all of his hats and has a huge collection. It ranges from fedoras to a regular baseball cap. Thats why I chose to draw them in this project.