Response to Kathy O'Dell

I enjoyed reading about "identification" when it comes to performance pieces. One of the things that makes a performance piece so powerful is how well the audience is able to connect with it. The fact that the main material of the piece is the human body makes the identification easier. It then got me thinking whether or not performance that is only seen later on video is as powerful as performance viewed in the moment. When video is incorporated into a performance, the body is no longer the main material used in the piece, the video camera is. Does that take away from the performance?
I also thought it was interesting thinking about how video art was not always accessible to the public due to the lack of technology in the past. Videos are so accessible to us today with the Internet that it is easy to forget that back in the 70s they had to rent out gallery space just to show their videos. Now, if they wanted to get their videos out to a bigger audience, they can put it on youtube or vimeo for the world to see.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Marks Response

I'm in an Arts Management and Entrepreneurship class about cultural policy right now, so I found this to be and interesting exploration of how Policy affects the creation of art. I always subconsciously figured that no matter what, people would continuously create art, which I still believe. I just never considered the ways in which policies about art would influence it's creation. Like in the same way that political changes would influence the tone of art, policy changes involving the commissioning and support of art and artistic spaces would affect they types of art produced. I've had a few conversations about how much art related to racial identity is borne of desire to create the type of art and how much is a result of a belief that that's t he type of art that sells most reliably for artists of color. It makes me wonder if there are policies that I don't know about that have impacted the amount of a particular type of art being produced, like museums
Read more

Response to Beard - Jack Davis

A quote from Sirk says that you can't make a film about things, you can only make films with things. These works by Shana Moulton seem to solely focus on specific objects, or "things". The subject of these works seems not to be her, but rather, the different whimsical and random objects that seem have a personality of their own. Puzzles, crystal light, artificial waterfalls. All of these objects seem to interact with Moulton, and are more than just static objects. They become alive and are just as much of a character as she is. She also uses different icons and imagery that seem to bring in ideas of institutions, but these seem to be very separated from the "objects".
Read more

Response To Thomas Beard

A quote at the end of the article resonated with me " So what’s changed? In short, the archive has exploded." Works like Whispering Pines are drawing from an archive of pop imagery, domestic patterns, new ageism, psychedelics, and domestic patterns to create a new hybrid commentary on our daily lives. Such a mixture, with so many various elements, would not be plausible in any other age but the digital one we are currently inhabiting- how could such a mish mash of elements possibly come together into a single body of work. The archive has allowed for an artist to draw from a diverse array of sources and to construct intersections, hybrids, and new ideas like never before. Whether an attached cushion, or a video portal, we are living in an age where there is more flexibility in the elements utilized, there is now a more abstract definition of what something means, and our own interpretation of it is more easily skewed,
Read more