Art 2840 Reading 10

This final reading is an interview between Peter Eleey and Olaf Blanke. Blanke and a team of neuroscientists developed a way to onset “out-of-body experiences.” To do so, the participant has to wear virtual goggles that make it appear they are infront of themselves; the person with the goggles only sees his/her back. When they have the goggles on, the team rubs the participants back with a paintbrush and these two elements combined cause the illusions. I find it very interesting that they found a way to trick our mental sensors into such illusions. This particular project uses the visual and physical sensories, goggles and paintbrushes, to fool the mind into believing you’re having an “out-of-body experience.”

Bruce Nauman also has a similar “experience” for participants to partake. It is called Live-Taped Video Corridor. People were allowed to walk down this corridor- at one end a video camera and at the other end a monitor. So as the participant walked down the corridor, they became farther away from the camera and closer to the monitor. People always want to see themselves on monitors for some reason, so I see this almost as a prank. As you get closer to the monitor, you’re farther away from the camera, so it would be hard to see yourself.

I do believe I have had an “out-of-body experience” at least twice in my life. One time in particular I remember is when I got my first pair of glasses. I put on the glasses and tried to walk. My perception of where I was and how close I was to everything was totally different. It was almost as if I couldn’t tell how far down the steps were or where I could put my foot. Its a very disorienting experience. Another example that I have is after working out on an elliptical. An elliptical works in gliding motions to simulate running. After being done working out and trying to walk normal becomes tricky. I felt like I was trying to walk faster and leaving my body behind me; almost like I was floating along. I have no complaints about the experiences- It just makes a person very disoriented.

Art 2840 Reading 9

This next reading was Screens- Viewing Media Installation Art by Kate Mondloch. The excerpt is about video installations and the attention span of the viewer. It talks about many artists that use giant scale screens and play time-altered video. For example, Douglas Gordon’s 24 Hour Psycho. Gordon used the movie Psycho but edited the run time to 24 hours. The video is projected onto a translucent screen; it can be watched from either side. The discussion is more about the viewer than the work itself. How long should viewers stay and watch the video? Its clearly not possible for the viewer to stay and watch all 24 hours in one visit- so what is appropriate? Because the video of 24 Hour Psycho is so drastically slowed down, it pushes the limits of the viewer. How long can you watch a video that is painstakingly slow? What is the viewer attention span for such videos? Another question that is asked is about the location. Does being at a gallery force the viewer to stay and watch, or does it invite the viewer to move on faster to the next piece? I think it all depends on the person and video. This reading gives several examples of different videos. I’d be more likely to stay and watch a video with dialogue rather than a video that is slowing going through frames.

Altering the concept of time through video is a very interesting concept. The artist can do whatever he/she pleases when it comes to speed and dialogue (or lack there of). The viewer doesn’t have a choice about video alteration, but they do have the choice of how much time they want to spend watching it. According to the reading, many viewers find themselves with reoccurring thoughts of the video clips at another time and place. That can be considered another aspect of time because the video is still continuing in your thoughts. The viewer is personally making the video last longer.

My question is, did the viewer know how long the videos actually were? If I walked into a gallery playing a video, I would want to watch the whole video. I would be more apt to sit and watch for a longer duration if I didn’t know it was a 24 hour long video. How long would the viewer sit until their nerves were shot or they became disinterested?

Art 2840 Reading 8

In Marina Abramovic’s video Four Performances, she has chosen to use her body to demonstrate four different points: 1. Art must be beautiful, Artist must be beautiful. 2. Freeing the voice. 3. Freeing the memory. 4. Freeing the body. I feel that in this video, shes pushing her body to it’s limits by doing these performances. In the reading from Institutions and Objections, Lea Vergine states her opinion that, “Those who are in pain will tell you that they have the right to be taken seriously.” I think that’s an interesting statement. Somehow pain makes it art? Chris Burden is a good example for this. His video of being shot in the arm is considered performance art. As far as Marina Abramovic’s work is concerned, I think its a test of physical endurance. She’s using her body as art, but pushing her abilities. For example, in the video she “frees her voice” by singing out a note for a very extended amount of time. Most people wouldn’t be willing to, or capable of doing that. On the other end of the scale, for “freeing her body” she dances naked. Its basically her using her body as her canvas.

In the article, the section on Marina Abramovic talks about other performance pieces that she has done. She did a performance where she stands in a doorway naked, making people have to walk around her. I find that project to be particularly funny. I think the sociology aspect is very interesting because most people refused to even look her in the face. I’m assuming it was her purpose to incur human response by standing naked. I think her performances using her body are very successful. Using her body allows her to touch on the issues of gender roles and the personal boundaries people set for themselves.

The Death of the Author

Roland Barthes essay The Death of the Author discusses the relationship between the author and the reader.

Art 2840 Reading 7

Matthew Barney’s Cremaster Cycle is a series of films, photographs, installations, sculptures, and drawings creating an allusion to the position of reproductive organs. There are five films and each one represents a stage of male testes from ascended to descended.

Marina Abramovic uses herself as performance art. Her piece The Artist Is Present is herself sitting at a table allowing spectators to sit silently and stare back. The viewer is allowed to sit with Abramovic as long as they wanted. Every visit is documented and available for viewing. I find it interesting to look to see the amounts of time people spend with the artist.

Both the artists use the body as an art form. Matthew Barney uses the reproductive system as a concept for his films. Marina Abramovic uses her body as art. In her piece, she sits and stares at the viewers as a performance. She is more interactive in her art than Barney. He uses actors/actresses and physical objects to create an anatomical allusion. So, both artists reference body parts, but only Abramovic uses her physical self. The viewers experience both the works by watching, but Abramovic is interactive in the sense that the viewers can sit down with her.

Art 2840 Reading 6

Art 2840 Reading 5

Reading 5 is about the concept of spectacle. To me, spectacle means something you see that is shocking or just makes you stop and stare. The reading ties spectacle back to the Greek tragedies in theatre and performing arts. It also defines spectacle as anything you see that elicits an emotional response. For example, public executions and torture are considered a spectacle. Because of all the new and evolving types of mediums, the role of the spectator develops and what we view as a spectacle is changing. The article talks about television and its role in desensitizing the spectator. I absolutely agree with the article in that media has made us immune to some spectacles. Television shows have changed drastically and anything can be expected when flipping through the channels. Random, crazy scenes are not rare anymore– and because of that, we have a mentality to expect anything.

Although I said that television has made us immune to spectacle, I must admit, I am not completely desensitized. There are two shows that I am addicted to that I would consider spectacles– Intervention and Hoarders on A&E. These shows elicit strong, emotional reactions from me. There is definitely a shock value to those shows, and they never cease to amaze me. They are like train-wrecks that I just can’t look away from. Another source of spectacle in my life is a photo series that I did for my senior thesis project. I used average people and photographed them acting/dressing like celebrities to illustrate the idea of obsession and desire for fame. The photos were supposed to cause a reaction from the viewer, whether the reaction was hate for the spectacle of celebrity or enjoyment of celebrity mockery. Here is the link for my project–   http://www.flickr.com/groups/1275717@N21/

Art 2840 Reading 4

Instead of a reading, I watched the video Lemak Bakia by Man Ray. This film was made in 1926 and contains lots of flashing images. Most of the film, it is hard to tell what image is on the screen. There is a lot of dramatic flashing, spinning, shiny objects moving around. One thing that I found interesting was when a person was shown in the film. I can relate back to the previous reading by Roland Barthes about how looking through someones eyes can be so revealing. I felt engaged when looking at the people because I felt like I was looking at the past. When the lady was dancing, it showed how people danced back in the 1920s. Or when the lady was putting on makeup, it shows how people dressed. All the portraits tell stories from the past and I was very interested to learn. Although I found some points interesting, it was hard for me to keep focused on the video. As a viewer, I felt the video is very scattered and left me with nothing to grasp on to. I honestly wonder if I had seen it on a different medium, like reel film, if it would make a bigger impression on me. Walter Benjamin talked about reproductions losing their aura, and I feel this is an example. I think it would be far more engaging in its original format. I also think the music that accompanied the film worked well. It kept up with the upbeat of the images– the film would not be the same with the music. In the reading by Walter Benjamin, he talks about film/photography related to speech as lithography relates to newspaper. Although the music did not have speech, I feel this is a good representation of that thought. The film’s constant changing images worked with the music. They complimented each other.

Art 2840 Reading 3

The third reading is called The Work of Art in the Age of Its Technological Reproducibility by Walter Benjamin. Although the reading starts off about politics (something that I know nothing about), it continues on about the reproducibility of art and how it changes the piece. Art was first able to be reproduced by woodcut, and later on came movable type. Lithography came around and marked a new stage of reproduction. “Lithography enabled graphic art to provide an illustrated accompaniment to everyday life (p. 102).” An example would be a newspaper. With movable type and lithography, images and type can be changed everyday. When photo came along, it went hand in hand with film, as did lithography with movable type. One problem with reproduction is that it is missing “the here and now.” Because it is reproduced, it is no longer unique. No traces of time can be found on reproductions. There are two reasons why technological reproductions are not forgeries: they are more independent of the original than is manual reproduction, and technological reproductions can place the copy of the original in situations the original can not obtain. The reading uses a cathedral as an example. You can’t take a cathedral to your house, but you can take a photo of a cathedral to hang on the walls. As the reading goes on, I get the feeling Walter Benjamin doesn’t like film. Benjamin states that film liquidates the value of tradition in the cultural heritage. Reproductions strip the originals of their aura, their uniqueness. Although it seems Benjamin does not like art reproductions, I feel they are a good thing. A reproduction isn’t meant to replace the original or take away from it, but to make the piece of art more assessable.

Art 2840 Reading 2

Camera Lucida by Roland Barthes was the second reading for class. I liked reading this excerpt because I am very interested in Photography. Roland Barthes goes very indepth about his feelings and confusions of photographs. The opening paragraph gave me something to think about. He said he looked in amazement at a photograph because he was looking at the eyes of someone who has seen the emperor. I don’t think of portraits that way, but it is an intriguing concept. Most portraits tell stories. Another part in the article that struck my interest was the paragraph that Barthes asks why we feel the need to photograph something, somewhere, at that very moment. Good question. I think photography is about feeling. Certain places give us certain feelings. And if you’re able to capture that feeling in a photo, why not? Barthes also talks about posing and how the mere presence of a camera alters the mood. If a person sees a camera, they automatically are posing. Whether they want to or not, they are very aware of the cameras presence. He says that posing leads to photographs of imposters. I do agree to a certain extent. By posing, the person is trying to make themselves look good, maybe try to be someone they’re not. But honestly, photographs show you how others perceive you. I think it’s a very interesting concept.