Reflection on Art & Cultural Politics

Where I can reflect on my fabulous class and let the world know how I disagree, contribute, or I guess agree with what goes on in class!
Wed Apr 16
CYLINDER SEALS FROM THE NATIONAL MUSEUM IN BAGHDAD So I know I talked about this in class the other day, but as I was hurrying along to make sure I got all the facts in, I inevitably missed some cool stuff too. So here’s the full account on cylinder seals.Cylinder seals were very common in Mesopotamian era, and can date from around 5,000 BCE- 300 BCE. They were usually about 1 inch wide and 4 inches high, in the shape of a cylinder so that they could be used to roll an imprint into wet clay. They grew up and were used at the same time that actual scritch-scratch became writing. The seals were usually made from some sort of stone, like limestone, or if you were rich lapis-lazuli; and they could be capped in gold if you were rich as well. Worn as a pin, armband, or necklace, it was a type of status, something like what we know as the signet ring. It showed authenticity of contracts, ownership, or was used as an official seal for shipments, so it served much the same purpose as a signet ring. It was also thought to bring good luck, power, and healing.As well as being very important during this era, they were also very common- anyone who had something to sell or verify had a cylinder seal. Nonetheless, each has a very impressive value.The National Museum in Baghdad had (supposedly) a collection of over 15,000 cylinder seals. In April of 2003, during the looting that took place in the museum, the exact number of seals stolen was thought to be 4,795- almost a third of this priceless collection. Since the looting, there has been a mad hunt for the cylinder seals along with the other pieces missing from the museum.In July of 2003, a man named Joseph Braude (who is known for his work on the news concerning Iraq’s social situations and has a book on Iraq as well I believe) had his bags checked at JFK in NYC as part of the bag-check routine. Inside one suitcase security guards found three cylinder seals, all stamped with the National Museum’s initials and serial numbers. Braude plead guilty of the charge of buying pieces without provenance and smuggling them out of the country (after first denying he’d been to Iraq at all). He had bought the seals for about $300.Interestingly enough, one cylinder seal has gone at auction, at Christie’s, in 2001 for $424,000.The FBI has also found eight cylinder seals and returned them to the National Museum.Eleven down, 4,784 to go! (insert sarcasm here)One of the biggest problems is that not all of the cylinder seals recovered in smuggling charges are from the National Museum in Baghdad. Many are just looted from different sites and sold directly to dealers or a connection to dealers. This means that although many cylinder seals are being recovered, very few actually belong to the museum. Another problem is some people’s cynicism on the subject. I read in one blog how an archaeologist related the cylinder seals as a common piece of history, and that the theft of some should not be taken so seriously, since there are always more where they came from.Some people seem to agree with how common the things are- I mean, jeeze, there have been cylinder seals sold on eBay before! (I checked, there are only copies available right now on eBay.) Even with the mixed feelings, the cylinder seals have been placed as the third most important antiquities to be recovered on the International Council of Museum’s Emergency Red List of Iraqi Antiquities at Risk. We’ll see what the future holds- but with so few found already, it could be a looooong time before we see this problem resolved.

CYLINDER SEALS FROM THE NATIONAL MUSEUM IN BAGHDAD

 So I know I talked about this in class the other day, but as I was hurrying along to make sure I got all the facts in, I inevitably missed some cool stuff too. So here’s the full account on cylinder seals.

Cylinder seals were very common in Mesopotamian era, and can date from around 5,000 BCE- 300 BCE. They were usually about 1 inch wide and 4 inches high, in the shape of a cylinder so that they could be used to roll an imprint into wet clay. They grew up and were used at the same time that actual scritch-scratch became writing. The seals were usually made from some sort of stone, like limestone, or if you were rich lapis-lazuli; and they could be capped in gold if you were rich as well. Worn as a pin, armband, or necklace, it was a type of status, something like what we know as the signet ring. It showed authenticity of contracts, ownership, or was used as an official seal for shipments, so it served much the same purpose as a signet ring. It was also thought to bring good luck, power, and healing.

As well as being very important during this era, they were also very common- anyone who had something to sell or verify had a cylinder seal. Nonetheless, each has a very impressive value.

The National Museum in Baghdad had (supposedly) a collection of over 15,000 cylinder seals. In April of 2003, during the looting that took place in the museum, the exact number of seals stolen was thought to be 4,795- almost a third of this priceless collection. Since the looting, there has been a mad hunt for the cylinder seals along with the other pieces missing from the museum.

In July of 2003, a man named Joseph Braude (who is known for his work on the news concerning Iraq’s social situations and has a book on Iraq as well I believe) had his bags checked at JFK in NYC as part of the bag-check routine. Inside one suitcase security guards found three cylinder seals, all stamped with the National Museum’s initials and serial numbers. Braude plead guilty of the charge of buying pieces without provenance and smuggling them out of the country (after first denying he’d been to Iraq at all). He had bought the seals for about $300.

Interestingly enough, one cylinder seal has gone at auction, at Christie’s, in 2001 for $424,000.

The FBI has also found eight cylinder seals and returned them to the National Museum.

Eleven down, 4,784 to go! (insert sarcasm here)

One of the biggest problems is that not all of the cylinder seals recovered in smuggling charges are from the National Museum in Baghdad. Many are just looted from different sites and sold directly to dealers or a connection to dealers. This means that although many cylinder seals are being recovered, very few actually belong to the museum.

Another problem is some people’s cynicism on the subject. I read in one blog how an archaeologist related the cylinder seals as a common piece of history, and that the theft of some should not be taken so seriously, since there are always more where they came from.

Some people seem to agree with how common the things are- I mean, jeeze, there have been cylinder seals sold on eBay before! (I checked, there are only copies available right now on eBay.) 

Even with the mixed feelings, the cylinder seals have been placed as the third most important antiquities to be recovered on the International Council of Museum’s Emergency Red List of Iraqi Antiquities at Risk. We’ll see what the future holds- but with so few found already, it could be a looooong time before we see this problem resolved.

Sun Apr 13
THE ART OF THE GARDEN I find it extremely interesting that everything that can be possibly be made into art is made into art. Take, for example, the garden. This has long been heralded as an artform- take Givenchy and Versailles for examples: they both are recognized as pristine forms of their respective plants and artistry achieved through the manipulation of nature. They can also be seen as a sign of power: the bigger the garden, the more power you have, etc. I find it mostly interesting that we try so hard to control something natural. Take this picture for example. It’s from the MHC greenhouse, and is set up in the middle of the flower show (or it was, I am not sure if the flower show is still flourishing). Everything is just so- nature does not control the set up here, where each potted plant can be placed wherever we want, alongside a plant that needs different soil or watering conditions- but yet they all flourish. Like most art, it shows a mastery at a skill. Why is that so important to the human race? Becasue below perfection is just the commonplace. But why can it not also be recognized? I am not really sure, but I can see why some pieces get more recognition that others. In fact, the British garden (very strict and precise, with clipped hedgerows and everything planted in a line) is still increasingly popular over the world. But, other types of gardens that are less precise and more organic are very popular as well, BUT they are harder to create. So which gets more attention, the multitude of perfectly pristine British-style gardens, or the fewer more organic gardens that achieve more natural excellence?Hmmm… 

THE ART OF THE GARDEN

 I find it extremely interesting that everything that can be possibly be made into art is made into art. Take, for example, the garden. This has long been heralded as an artform- take Givenchy and Versailles for examples: they both are recognized as pristine forms of their respective plants and artistry achieved through the manipulation of nature. They can also be seen as a sign of power: the bigger the garden, the more power you have, etc. I find it mostly interesting that we try so hard to control something natural. Take this picture for example. It’s from the MHC greenhouse, and is set up in the middle of the flower show (or it was, I am not sure if the flower show is still flourishing). Everything is just so- nature does not control the set up here, where each potted plant can be placed wherever we want, alongside a plant that needs different soil or watering conditions- but yet they all flourish. Like most art, it shows a mastery at a skill. Why is that so important to the human race? Becasue below perfection is just the commonplace. But why can it not also be recognized? I am not really sure, but I can see why some pieces get more recognition that others. In fact, the British garden (very strict and precise, with clipped hedgerows and everything planted in a line) is still increasingly popular over the world. But, other types of gardens that are less precise and more organic are very popular as well, BUT they are harder to create. So which gets more attention, the multitude of perfectly pristine British-style gardens, or the fewer more organic gardens that achieve more natural excellence?

Hmmm… 

Wed Apr 2
THE AMBER ROOM This room has the most amazing history. First, it was made in the early 1700’s and gifted to one of the Russian Tsars (forgive my lack of names, I am going off script for this entry). It changed places in Russia once, and was in the Catherine Palace until WWII. What is this room, you might ask? A room covered completely in amber panels, arranged in puzzle pieces. There are carvings, mosaics, and some actual pieces (like a chest of drawers) that adorned the room. Basically, it’s friggin’ amazing. Now, for those of you who have seen the Rape of Europa, this is stuff you already know. This is not so much what I am interested in.What gets me into it is what happened next. When the Russians had to evacuate St. Petersburg, they took as much as they could with them. BUT they were unable to take the Amber Room, because when they tried to remove it, it started to crumble. So, they made a hard decision and covered it up with boring wallpaper (a silly idea, since the room was very well known even then) and left it there.This is where it gets really interesting. No one’s quite sure what happened next. Some think the room went up with everything else in the fire set by the Nazis at Catherine Palace. Others are sure that it was packed up and moved by the Nazis. Where to? This is where it gets even better.No one knows for sure. Some people are POSITIVE that 27 crates were removed from the Amber Room (the full contents) and then were moved somewhere around the world. One theory is that it was put in one of Hitler’s huge hords. There’s a list of over thirty castles that could be the site of where the Amber Room pieces were kept. There’s also the theory that it was loaded onto a submarine on the Baltic Sea, which was then sunk by the Allies and now the Amber Room is at the bottom of the ocean. Another theory (more recent) is that it lays at the bottom of Lake Toplitz in Austria, where they have already found bank notes (in pounds) and a press to create counterfeit currency, once meant to destroy Great Britain’s economy during the war. One group thinks they have an eye witness who saw the German Nazis dump 27 crates into the lake, all shaped for easy retrieval.Beyond that there are hundreds of other theories, including mines, breweries, boobytrapped wells, mountain hideaways, caves, etc.In the meantime, Russia puts their main effort into recreating the Amber Room. In the 1970’s, they start work (this is after 11 years of studying how the room was done in the first place, including how the resin was made and applied with the olden day technique). Happily, during this work period, two pieces are found from the original Amber Room- a chest of drawers and a mosaic (this had already been recreated by the time the mosaic was discovered, so the new mosaic was left in). In 2003, the room was completed, and quoted to be “better than the original.”2003 is also when the rumor about Lake Toplitz came forward. And now, as recently as February, there has been a brand new discovery in Deutschneudorf, a small town near the border of Germany and Prague. They have found a man-made cavern filled with silver and gold. Sadly, just a week after the impressive preliminary searches into the cavern (which was merely through electromagnetic waves), the team in charge of the search fought over something, and the group was called off because of the two leaders’ differences. So who knows when this will get more funding. Even if it continues, who knows if all this gold and silver is really a true sign of the emergence of the original panels of the Amber Room?There are about thirty books published on the topic of the room once called the eighth wonder of the world, and they are all (except for maybe three) solely published in German. The Amber Room also remains as a spearhead for the campaign to find Nazi-looted artworks.What do I think? I think that if the Russians could not remove the amber panels without them disintegrating into dust, that at least part of the room will never be found. If some pieces did survive being removed, I guess they could really be anywhere- though some of the stories become rather extravagant and based solely on heresy. I assume it’s a matter of time before it’s found- but considering it’s made out of resin and honey, I don’t think there’s much chance of finding anything worth redemption if it isn’t found within the next fifty years.BUT if it was found, that would be a cool $100-$250 million in someone’s pocket- the estimated worth of the original Amber Room.

THE AMBER ROOM

This room has the most amazing history. First, it was made in the early 1700’s and gifted to one of the Russian Tsars (forgive my lack of names, I am going off script for this entry). It changed places in Russia once, and was in the Catherine Palace until WWII. What is this room, you might ask? A room covered completely in amber panels, arranged in puzzle pieces. There are carvings, mosaics, and some actual pieces (like a chest of drawers) that adorned the room. Basically, it’s friggin’ amazing. Now, for those of you who have seen the Rape of Europa, this is stuff you already know. This is not so much what I am interested in.

What gets me into it is what happened next. When the Russians had to evacuate St. Petersburg, they took as much as they could with them. BUT they were unable to take the Amber Room, because when they tried to remove it, it started to crumble. So, they made a hard decision and covered it up with boring wallpaper (a silly idea, since the room was very well known even then) and left it there.

This is where it gets really interesting. No one’s quite sure what happened next. Some think the room went up with everything else in the fire set by the Nazis at Catherine Palace. Others are sure that it was packed up and moved by the Nazis. Where to? This is where it gets even better.

No one knows for sure. Some people are POSITIVE that 27 crates were removed from the Amber Room (the full contents) and then were moved somewhere around the world. One theory is that it was put in one of Hitler’s huge hords. There’s a list of over thirty castles that could be the site of where the Amber Room pieces were kept. There’s also the theory that it was loaded onto a submarine on the Baltic Sea, which was then sunk by the Allies and now the Amber Room is at the bottom of the ocean. Another theory (more recent) is that it lays at the bottom of Lake Toplitz in Austria, where they have already found bank notes (in pounds) and a press to create counterfeit currency, once meant to destroy Great Britain’s economy during the war. One group thinks they have an eye witness who saw the German Nazis dump 27 crates into the lake, all shaped for easy retrieval.

Beyond that there are hundreds of other theories, including mines, breweries, boobytrapped wells, mountain hideaways, caves, etc.

In the meantime, Russia puts their main effort into recreating the Amber Room. In the 1970’s, they start work (this is after 11 years of studying how the room was done in the first place, including how the resin was made and applied with the olden day technique). Happily, during this work period, two pieces are found from the original Amber Room- a chest of drawers and a mosaic (this had already been recreated by the time the mosaic was discovered, so the new mosaic was left in). In 2003, the room was completed, and quoted to be “better than the original.”

2003 is also when the rumor about Lake Toplitz came forward. And now, as recently as February, there has been a brand new discovery in Deutschneudorf, a small town near the border of Germany and Prague. They have found a man-made cavern filled with silver and gold. Sadly, just a week after the impressive preliminary searches into the cavern (which was merely through electromagnetic waves), the team in charge of the search fought over something, and the group was called off because of the two leaders’ differences. So who knows when this will get more funding. Even if it continues, who knows if all this gold and silver is really a true sign of the emergence of the original panels of the Amber Room?

There are about thirty books published on the topic of the room once called the eighth wonder of the world, and they are all (except for maybe three) solely published in German. The Amber Room also remains as a spearhead for the campaign to find Nazi-looted artworks.

What do I think? I think that if the Russians could not remove the amber panels without them disintegrating into dust, that at least part of the room will never be found. If some pieces did survive being removed, I guess they could really be anywhere- though some of the stories become rather extravagant and based solely on heresy. I assume it’s a matter of time before it’s found- but considering it’s made out of resin and honey, I don’t think there’s much chance of finding anything worth redemption if it isn’t found within the next fifty years.

BUT if it was found, that would be a cool $100-$250 million in someone’s pocket- the estimated worth of the original Amber Room.

Wed Mar 26
Marion True: Guilty or Not?So this is the topic for our class today, but I am seriously not feeling well, and am not in class today, and will probably type this in little bits because of that. But it’s important to know my stand on this subject, I think.Marion True, the former curator of the Getty, is up on some serious antiquities charges in Italy concerning somewhere around 40 objects that were purchased by the Getty after 1970 without provenance being able to be determined. This is a problem that is happening with tons of museums lately, and either antiquities or Nazi spoils are the subject.Marion True had some very shady connections with people who ended up being part of smuggling rings, which is mainly how she was brought in. There are also such suspicious facts of her involvement as how she got a personal loan from a couple who had just given their entire private collection to the Getty (with most pieces missing provenance) so she could buy a house (her second house, to be precise), the value of which is estimated at $400,000. Hmm… things are not looking so good for True here.But she is either very innocent or very clever. The history she has with these dealers is laced with stories of bribes she refused, and of how she was not the only one doing this at the time, and how she had the full support of the Board of Trustees at the Getty on her side with every single purchase.This can be construed two ways (I suggest reading up on the topic before reading what I think- the LA Times has covered it a bunch, as well as a great article in the New Yorker, or you can check out the Archaeology magazine online) either Marion True is just someone to be thrown in and blamed and the circumstances are convenient for getting the result that the Italians want, or Marion True is guilty of the circumstances and is twisting what evidence they have against her.Here’s what I think. Marion True is a scapegoat. Despite whether she is guilty or not, the important thing is that she is not the only one guilty of these crimes- she is just the one being dragged into court right now. It’s a pivotal case, where if she gets charged and sentenced, then it will lead to other countries following suit on other curators. Do you think it’s coincidence that the first case that gets this type of publicity concerns a previous curator for the Getty? Or that some of the other people involved are willing to get involved because of their age? (One of the people, Robert Hecht, cannot by law serve jail time in Italy because he is 88, which is over some kind of limit for jail-time punishment. So he’s taking this amazingly well.) Beyond that, is it coincidence that they didn’t pick someone like Phillipe de Montebello (curator of the Met), who has had many of these same problems with provenance and returning pieces as well and instead of being hauled into court all the time, he is working out deals for returning the art, if he lets anyone get near the things at all. No. They chose a woman whose regal carriage impresses the Italians and who is well respected throughout the art world because of her many connections, connections that may well be called into question if she is sentenced. She is a convenient figure for this topic, mostly in an American point of view. So I think it more interesting not to study her guilt (although, hey, if one of her main arguments is that she’s not the only one procuring things this way, she has a bad lawyer. Because honestly, has no one ever heard the saying “Would you jump off a bridge just because your friends did?” I mean seriously. If she is guilty of all this knowledge surrounding this case, she was doing it to save her job probably. If she didn’t make those acquisitions for the Getty, she probably wouldn’t have been curator for very long) but rather why she is the one that is getting most publicized. And it’s all about the politics. Oh, Marion True.

Marion True: Guilty or Not?

So this is the topic for our class today, but I am seriously not feeling well, and am not in class today, and will probably type this in little bits because of that. But it’s important to know my stand on this subject, I think.

Marion True, the former curator of the Getty, is up on some serious antiquities charges in Italy concerning somewhere around 40 objects that were purchased by the Getty after 1970 without provenance being able to be determined. This is a problem that is happening with tons of museums lately, and either antiquities or Nazi spoils are the subject.

Marion True had some very shady connections with people who ended up being part of smuggling rings, which is mainly how she was brought in. There are also such suspicious facts of her involvement as how she got a personal loan from a couple who had just given their entire private collection to the Getty (with most pieces missing provenance) so she could buy a house (her second house, to be precise), the value of which is estimated at $400,000. Hmm… things are not looking so good for True here.

But she is either very innocent or very clever. The history she has with these dealers is laced with stories of bribes she refused, and of how she was not the only one doing this at the time, and how she had the full support of the Board of Trustees at the Getty on her side with every single purchase.

This can be construed two ways (I suggest reading up on the topic before reading what I think- the LA Times has covered it a bunch, as well as a great article in the New Yorker, or you can check out the Archaeology magazine online) either Marion True is just someone to be thrown in and blamed and the circumstances are convenient for getting the result that the Italians want, or Marion True is guilty of the circumstances and is twisting what evidence they have against her.

Here’s what I think. Marion True is a scapegoat. Despite whether she is guilty or not, the important thing is that she is not the only one guilty of these crimes- she is just the one being dragged into court right now. It’s a pivotal case, where if she gets charged and sentenced, then it will lead to other countries following suit on other curators. Do you think it’s coincidence that the first case that gets this type of publicity concerns a previous curator for the Getty? Or that some of the other people involved are willing to get involved because of their age? (One of the people, Robert Hecht, cannot by law serve jail time in Italy because he is 88, which is over some kind of limit for jail-time punishment. So he’s taking this amazingly well.) Beyond that, is it coincidence that they didn’t pick someone like Phillipe de Montebello (curator of the Met), who has had many of these same problems with provenance and returning pieces as well and instead of being hauled into court all the time, he is working out deals for returning the art, if he lets anyone get near the things at all. No. They chose a woman whose regal carriage impresses the Italians and who is well respected throughout the art world because of her many connections, connections that may well be called into question if she is sentenced. She is a convenient figure for this topic, mostly in an American point of view. So I think it more interesting not to study her guilt (although, hey, if one of her main arguments is that she’s not the only one procuring things this way, she has a bad lawyer. Because honestly, has no one ever heard the saying “Would you jump off a bridge just because your friends did?” I mean seriously. If she is guilty of all this knowledge surrounding this case, she was doing it to save her job probably. If she didn’t make those acquisitions for the Getty, she probably wouldn’t have been curator for very long) but rather why she is the one that is getting most publicized. And it’s all about the politics. Oh, Marion True.
Tue Mar 11
MoMA's Provenance Project

So the big thing in the art world right now (especially for museums) is who has the true right to pieces of art. In fact, while it has been a very hot topic since 1970 with UNESCO’s agreement about smuggled pieces and patrimony lining up (for those who don’t know, this agreement basically stated that wherever it was found, that’s who owns it), it has been in just the past few years that real headway has been made.

 One area specifically is with Nazi-era plunder. Interestingly enough, my father was telling me about someone he knew growing up, who had been a very good amateur and professional art collector. He actually had the role, during WWII, to go into recently seized Nazi territory, and take art pieces of value for the Americans to keep. I was really surprised by that- I had no idea our country had such aspirations, that people would be employed for that when they could be actually fighting in the war (this man’s position was actually in the military).

And now everyone who had ancestors (or in a few cases it’s the actual person) that owned paintings that they had to leave behind, are suing for ownership of the pieces and to return them. To counteract this, most museums have been following the rule that if the provenance (or purchase and ownership history) of a piece cannot be proved, than it should not be bought. The Met has broken this rule quite a few times. To protect pieces already in the collection, most museums are posting their provenance information. The MoMA is one of them.

Above is the site for the MoMA’s Provenance Research Project. It lists all the pieces that could possibly be Nazi plunder, and what they have found while researching their histories. I personally looked into the information for a piece of Cézanne’s, called Neige fondante à Fontainebleau. Its history gets a little blurry (conveniently) just before the Nazi occupation of Paris. Hmmm…. it’s interesting to look into these things!

Mon Mar 10
THE GATES by Christo and Jeanne-Claude (a photo)I love this piece of art. It brings up some interesting subjects- such as whether installation art is seen differently because it is not necessarily permanent. The Gates was up for less than a year, and was celebrated and laughed at in turn (laughing before it opened, celebrating once revealed). Is this piece more valuable because of its short life? I’m not sure. While the piece that was set up in Central Park certainly was the main goal, now what is precious is not the photographs but the sketches Christo created, in great detail, of the project. Now, instead of devouring what it was, we devour how it was created. We are more interested in the vision than the actuality it presented. If you go to a site on posters, what you’ll find is pricy (from $15- over $80, unframed) posters of Christo’s sketches, and no photos of The Gates at all. How odd.And on an odd note- did you know that the Eiffel Tower was supposed to be installation art? It was only supposed to be up for five years, but so many people loved it it stayed up. And isn’t it also funny that the other structure in Paris that brings such hype- the inverted and regular pyramid at the Louvre- is something that was to be permanent that the public so detested at first? Did constance make the heart grow fonder? If my theory on The Gates is to be believed, then the French will never accept those giant pyramids. BUT on the same hand, does this mean if the French do warm up that what is set up for The Gates is merely being lost in time and loved no more? I like to think we actually straddle these problems, so that some things grow fonder over time, while the things that garner our love on first site (haha, get it? first SITE- not sight) stay in our hearts forever.

THE GATES by Christo and Jeanne-Claude (a photo)

I love this piece of art. It brings up some interesting subjects- such as whether installation art is seen differently because it is not necessarily permanent. The Gates was up for less than a year, and was celebrated and laughed at in turn (laughing before it opened, celebrating once revealed). Is this piece more valuable because of its short life? I’m not sure. While the piece that was set up in Central Park certainly was the main goal, now what is precious is not the photographs but the sketches Christo created, in great detail, of the project. Now, instead of devouring what it was, we devour how it was created. We are more interested in the vision than the actuality it presented. If you go to a site on posters, what you’ll find is pricy (from $15- over $80, unframed) posters of Christo’s sketches, and no photos of The Gates at all. How odd.

And on an odd note- did you know that the Eiffel Tower was supposed to be installation art? It was only supposed to be up for five years, but so many people loved it it stayed up. And isn’t it also funny that the other structure in Paris that brings such hype- the inverted and regular pyramid at the Louvre- is something that was to be permanent that the public so detested at first? Did constance make the heart grow fonder? If my theory on The Gates is to be believed, then the French will never accept those giant pyramids. BUT on the same hand, does this mean if the French do warm up that what is set up for The Gates is merely being lost in time and loved no more? I like to think we actually straddle these problems, so that some things grow fonder over time, while the things that garner our love on first site (haha, get it? first SITE- not sight) stay in our hearts forever.

Just So I Can Prove A Point.This is another painting, using exactly the same information. Notice that it’s different? I won’t test anymore, but feel free to do so yourself.

Just So I Can Prove A Point.

This is another painting, using exactly the same information. Notice that it’s different? I won’t test anymore, but feel free to do so yourself.

My Very Own PaintingSo here it is! A way for everyone to express their moods through art. I found this site at bored.com (just click on Create Your Own Painting) and fill out the questions. Once you’re done, you have an original piece of art that can’t be duplicated EVER- I tried entering the same info twice, but I came up with two different paintings.I thought this was interesting because it appeals to the artist in all of us. We love to let our creativity flow, whether it be through a silly website or realing picking up a canvas. And I thought it was kind of eery that there is a computer program with possibly infinite types of paintings, all imitating whatever the “artist’s” mood is. First a computer playing chess was revolutionary. What next- exhibits created by robots? 

My Very Own Painting

So here it is! A way for everyone to express their moods through art. I found this site at bored.com (just click on Create Your Own Painting) and fill out the questions. Once you’re done, you have an original piece of art that can’t be duplicated EVER- I tried entering the same info twice, but I came up with two different paintings.

I thought this was interesting because it appeals to the artist in all of us. We love to let our creativity flow, whether it be through a silly website or realing picking up a canvas. And I thought it was kind of eery that there is a computer program with possibly infinite types of paintings, all imitating whatever the “artist’s” mood is. First a computer playing chess was revolutionary. What next- exhibits created by robots? 

TRAVIS FIMMELOkay, Berger. Look at this and tell me that the male does not have the same “conscious of how others view them” gaze that supposedly all women inherently have.Need I say more? 

TRAVIS FIMMEL

Okay, Berger. Look at this and tell me that the male does not have the same “conscious of how others view them” gaze that supposedly all women inherently have.

Need I say more? 

Piss Christ by Andres SerranoI have a bit to say about this picture and others that are controversial for the public. GET OVER IT. If you don’t like it, don’t look at it. It is a type of freedom of speech/expression to do this type of art, and did it ever occur to you that maybe part of why Serrano did it was to make people go loco over it? And the thing is, if I hadn’t known that was bodily fluid, I would think it was a gorgeous, ethereal photograph. In fact, most days I still think that. If it bothers you religiously or personally or in any way at all, then don’t support the gallery that has it up. There are other galleries who would appreciate your support. But just let the people be who are enjoying it, or who go to gawk at it. I am sure there are plenty of those as well.This piece is obviously more about a reaction than how beautiful it could. Otherwise the artist would have omitted it was piss around the favorite figure. He could have used yellow colored water instead, or champagne. But he didn’t. There’s obviously something behind this than just the beauty the artist wishes to portray. It is also about getting a rise out of you, the viewer. And you’re just playing into his hands if you react so thoroughly to it. If you really want to show your distaste, do next to nothing. That way he won’t get the reaction he wanted, you won’t have to be seeing it or support the place it’s at, and we can all stop hearing about how much it bothers you. The end.

Piss Christ by Andres Serrano

I have a bit to say about this picture and others that are controversial for the public. GET OVER IT. If you don’t like it, don’t look at it. It is a type of freedom of speech/expression to do this type of art, and did it ever occur to you that maybe part of why Serrano did it was to make people go loco over it? And the thing is, if I hadn’t known that was bodily fluid, I would think it was a gorgeous, ethereal photograph. In fact, most days I still think that. If it bothers you religiously or personally or in any way at all, then don’t support the gallery that has it up. There are other galleries who would appreciate your support. But just let the people be who are enjoying it, or who go to gawk at it. I am sure there are plenty of those as well.

This piece is obviously more about a reaction than how beautiful it could. Otherwise the artist would have omitted it was piss around the favorite figure. He could have used yellow colored water instead, or champagne. But he didn’t. There’s obviously something behind this than just the beauty the artist wishes to portray. It is also about getting a rise out of you, the viewer. And you’re just playing into his hands if you react so thoroughly to it. If you really want to show your distaste, do next to nothing. That way he won’t get the reaction he wanted, you won’t have to be seeing it or support the place it’s at, and we can all stop hearing about how much it bothers you. The end.

ACGHK!!!!

So, as you may have noticed, it seems as though I stopped posting for a while.

THIS IS NOT TRUE. What is true is that somehow, I mass deleted some by accident. And now I have to create more, or recreate what I had. This is tough. I had some good quality stuff- I KNEW I should have saved them all in word documents!

Luckily, some got left, so there are still those. But I am starting basically fresh. Please forgive me! 

Art In Society

So I was thinking today, as I relooked the journal assignment, about how art affects society. And the easiest thing to do, obviously, is to type ine “art in society” on google. So I did, and this is what I came up with.

There are some things that I wanted to delve deeper into though. Even though the above link covers much, I feel it could expand or diversify some of its philosophy. Like one time it talks about how art is supposed to show a depiction that relates to the highest number of people in society. BUT I disagree. I think that’s not just art- it’s advertising. So is what they’re saying is that art in society can only be advertising?

 For those who are a little confused, let me expand: art is something that, even if it doesn’t make sense right away to anyone, draws a person in. It can be disgust that gets them there, it can be awe or confusion. But art does not necessarily need to be understood by the masses, merely viewed by them and create a reaction.

 Advertising on the other hand, is something that should make people understand immediately, and produce happy feelings- laughter, enjoyment, agreement, etc. And not just that- but advertising targets certain types of people. Take this tampon commercial I saw yesterday (yes I know- even tampons are considered artistic at times). There is this woman, in her mid twenties, who looks out her window at her date, who is sitting in this pimped-out car (spinning rims, flame graphics, a wing, the works) and a little bubble girl of the same age pops in and says “Upgrade,” and the car and date turn into this “devastating knight on a white horse.” Then the same thing happens in the bathroom where the old tampon becomes the new, better, more fabulous one.

This ad makes me think a few things. First, that they only want women in their mid to late twenties to use this product. Second, that this ad should appeal to that age group because of the shining knight on the just as shiny horse (by the way, this is not true- some girls would be happier with the pimped-out car and cool dude riding in the front), and that anyone who disagrees should not buy this product. So this is set for a certain audience, which I think is kinda ridiculous. Plus, the fact that they’re upgrading implies that it would cost more money to do so- just as any upgrade in life usually costs us. So they are asking not only to buy their product, but to continually spend more money.

That’s not really art. What is is something that can be enjoyed by the few or the masses! There is one thing they got right in the article though- that the masses should have the opportunity of looking at it. And if people have a problem with certain pieces, then they don’t have to go see them. But the people who do shouldn’t be restricted by what others want to see or not. I am a stickler for that! 

Wed Feb 13

A bit on Fischer…

I know I said I’d write more on Berger and what I find so wrong with him, but I must write about my newest realization with Fischer and his talking about museums leading paths through time.

 I just realized how true it was that this is the highest achievement of a museum. I have only stepped into the Guggenheim, and it was painted black at the time for an exhibit from Brazil, but it impressed me how easily it was to follow such a concrete path through history by following the objects.

Also, one of the times I remember most from any museum in my life was when I was twelve, in France with my parents, grandparents and sister. We stopped at Monet’s house in Giverny, and there in a special room they had set up an exhibit of his “Water Lilies.”  They had three or four pieces of the art, separate paintings, but they had set them in this room, a ROUND room, with special frames so they could curve along the walls. I felt encompassed by the water lilies I had just seen outside, and I cannot help but concur with Fischer when he speaks of paths and an insistent pattern in seeing art. In Giverny, they found their desired effect, even if it was not chronological.

Wed Feb 6

Welcome!

Welcome to my blog about my art history class I’m taking this term- Art and Cultural Politics, a class I am super excited for.

I guess I should just dive in and let everyone know my thoughts about what we’ve done so far. 

This week we read a book called Ways of Seeing by John Berger. It was interesting, I’ll admit. But many of his ideas from the 1970’s, when the book was published, don’t take in the real picture of the 21st century.

We are a century of technology! We embrace it! So when Berger mentions that reproductions make a piece of art less valuable because it is COMMON, I beg to differ.

Let me explain. Berger sees each reproduction as taking a piece away from the whole. I see a reproduction as something that the masses can relate to. Now while the world is trying really hard in many instances to make art accessible to the masses, not everyone is near the masterpiece they desire to see. For instance, Americans are not up close and personal with the Mona Lisa, since it resides in France. BUT with the help of a reproduction, we can get a feel of the piece of art. Imagine- if someone loves the Mona Lisa so much in a reproduction, how will they feel if they get to see the real thing? A million times better.

But here is where my example is flawed, because the Mona Lisa is kept back at least twenty feet from prying eyes under bulletproof glass at the Louvre, where the number of tourists passing it allows you only a ten-second glimpse of what you desire. Here, let me show you, courtesy of BBCNews:

Mona Lisa Setup See how far away it is? And they usually have tape set up to keep people back. Ridiculous.

Fortunately for me, this also just proves how right I am compared to Berger. Not only do the masses not get a good look at this amazing piece of art, or time to study the significance of it, to SEE it as he would say, but also because of the light damage caused by cameras and sunlight, a reproduction might show the glory a bit better in this situation. So yes, the reproduction is taking away value in a sense from the true Mona Lisa, BUT the Mona Lisa is of lesser glory because of the greed of different people for the value of the original, which is what Berger is vying for! Ridiculous. 

 I have more to write about Berger, but it’s dinner time. I’ll be back.