After reading Escaping Flatland by Tufte, it gave me a new perspective on all of the information I take in on a day to day basis and how I process it. Before reading this, I honestly never noticed that the majority of the information that I interact with is two-dimensional. This obviously includes social media but I never took in to account how this is true for most learning tools we use in school as well. For example, books, essays, pictures etc. The fact that most of the information we take in and learn from is two dimensional makes me wonder how limited the amount of information or the way we process it is.
Monday, January 30, 2017
During our trip to the Baltimore Museum of Art, I noticed many interesting pieces of art. I was very intrigued by the modern and contemporary art, so I spent most of the time that I had in that section of the museum. While I was looking around, there was one specific piece that stood out to me which was "Greater Black Astral Dripper" by Jimmy Joe Roche. This piece was made in 2013 and I found it particularly interesting because it was based on the brain and psychological testing. Another piece that I thought was very interesting was "Won't" by Ed Ruscha. This piece was made in 1964. I liked that there was really no information about it on its informations tag so it was left up to interpretation. The final piece that I photographed was painted with oil on canvas by Jo Baer in 1975 and was left untitled. I thought it was interesting how something so plain could be so left up to interpretation and even end up in such an amazing museum.
Monday, January 23, 2017
Italo Calvino points out that there are different aspects of the imaginative process. He specifically mentions that one can either put an image to a word, or creating words from an image. However, Calvino states that the imagination is like the problem of “the chicken and the egg” because we never know what creativity came from where. For example, are specific images that we see in our minds made up? Or are they things that we have seen in the past? It stood out to me when Calvino wrote “ Think, for instance, of a writer who is trying to confer certain ideas which to him are contained in mental images. He isn't quite sure hoe those images fit together in his mind, and he experiments around, expressing things first one way and then another, and finally settles on some version. But does he know where it all came from? Only in a deep vague sense. Much of the source, like an iceberg, is deep under water, unseen-and he knows that. An individuals imagination seems to be a very complex things. Just like how everyone perceives art differently, we all have completely different imaginations too.
Wednesday, January 18, 2017
Reading "The Whole Ball of Wax" gave me a deeper understating of the concept of art in general. Everyone views art differently. Some people see it as a form of entertainment, some people see it as an expression of society and some people simply don't think it means anything at all. The list of different perspectives people have on art goes on and on. In some cases, art can change peoples outlook on the world without even trying to. Something that stuck with me in the article was when Saltz said " Neither Andy Warhol or Donald Judd made overtly political art. Yet both changed the way the world looks and the way we look at the world". I believe that since art is interpreted differently by every individual, it can have a million different meanings. Art has the power to provoke different emotions from everyone who sees it and also impact society as a whole. It is a truly unique from of expression to the world.