Over Thanksgiving break I was thinking about how it seems that all our holidays have to do with consuming things whether it’s material things like presents or food. Thanksgiving is the biggest food one all you do is eat until your stuffed. But we don’t just eat anything most of us eat the traditional thanksgiving food like turkey, mashed potatoes, gravy, cranberry’s and pumpkin pie. I have noticed that because of this consuming that some of the holiday’s have become less about there true meaning and more about just consuming what society has defined us to consume. Granted I love the holiday’s but shouldn’t we be thankful for every meal we have with our family whether it’s Thanksgiving or not? Christmas seems to be all about the presents. We all have to go out and shop generally purchasing things we don’t need but it’s Christmas we have to buy stuff. To me it makes more sense to buy stuff on a need/want bases. Like if I need a new jacket I just go out then and get it why wait for a holiday to purchase something. I find shopping during the holidays to be a hassle. Yet when I go any other time I enjoy it. This year when it came time to make my list this year I was like what do I need and nothing came to mind. I really didn’t know of anything I really wanted my list was blank but my Mom and Grandma were like we need your list. So I ended up making two list full of bunch of stuff that will be nice to have but none of which I needed or really even wanted. I for the first time felt forced to want stuff because not wanting anything was unacceptable it’s Christmas you have to get stuff. Then when I was doing my shopping for my sister she wanted this stuffed animal and it like pained me to buy it because I know that she has like 100 stuffed animals does she really need another one. Yet, I bought it and she will get it and like for like a couple and then forget about it. I think I might be turning into the Grinch. But I feel like out society is under the belief that if go along with the tradition of consuming that makes you good but if you don’t that makes you a bad person.
This week in lecture, we really just talked about some history and a few people who changed the world with their inventions. Great to know, but kind of hard to use, let alone comment with an opinion on. I didn’t get a chance to ask questions about Collapse this week in discussion though, so I will take this time to comment now.
We were supposed to cover the first 9 chapters and discuss them in class. I was going to lead discussion, and I actually learned about the different societies that fell and are no longer. The primary example used was how the Norse came into Greenland and took over. Diamond explains how they 100% disregarded the culture of Greenland and ravaged the land. Don’t know how to pass an opinion on that, but in the end, people are out to survive and did a pretty good job of it. Sure, they ruined the land and their society collapsed, but to take over a land in the arctic, actually colonize it, and to function would take a lot of work and skill.
I continued to read about the Mayans and formed one of my questions off of that, thinking if something could happen like that; if some sort of society could collapse so quickly that people wouldn’t know what happened. I thought that things like that just didn’t happen today, that countries and peoples were here to stay. Then in class, we started discussing modern day collapses, in which Nazi Germany, and the Soviet Union came up, and totally caught me off guard. I was completely thinking the wrong mindset, I was only considering environmental collapses or collapses with great societies being decimated. But with the USSR and Germany, their political structure and methods totally ended them in a matter of days or a few years.
I began thinking about America then, if we would collapse in my lifetime. It’s going to happen, it’s inevitable. We just don’t realize how short we’ve been around in relative terms. One of the oldest civilizations was the Byzantine Empire and Constantinople, which lasted over 1000 years but is hardly discussed in classes. Yet, America is coming up on 150 years and we feel like the oldest nation ever. I personally think we won’t have a chance to get to an environmental collapse, the world has too much of a chip on it’s shoulder from us and could possibly come back to get us.
I have to say, the image posted on this week’s statement definitely intrigued me, and so I decided to delve further into the online portfolio of Beth Dow. What I discovered is a breath-taking collection of unexpectedly emotional photography. Her portfolio titled Fieldwork particularly entranced me, with its delicate display of natural heartache and splendor. The portfolio is filled with images of nature - nature on the verge of death, nature manipulated, nature abused, nature at its most ominous, and most importantly, nature alive despite all this. The black and white effect on all of her photos enhances their poignancy and helps distinguish the themes of damage and isolation present throughout this particular set of photos. The undeniable attractiveness of these photographs paves the way for a clash of interest, a tension between their mysterious beauty and the quiet tragedy clearly unfolding throughout these simple images. Many images are just of rocks, dead tree stumps or abandoned dirt roads, but through her telling eye, Dow captures the magnificence of each scene. Furthermore, her manipulation of the frame in creating unique compositions is very compelling. For instance, the subject matter of the image titled Three Rocks may lurk on the edge of the frame, but as a result the white empty void left in the middle of the piece takes on its own beauty and presence.
Despite how much I like and appreciate Dow’s work, I would love to see a few certain elements manipulated, if simply for the love of experiment. First, I wonder how she would fair with color in her pictures. While the black and white is ominously enchanting, it would be interesting to see what type of life or new meaning each photo were to take on if introduced to some tone. Lastly I find the delicate contrast of her original photos soulful, but I would not mind seeing an increase in that contrast on only a few of her pictures to see how the new bolder mood would interact with the subject matter. Other than these few ponderings though, Beth Dow’s photography is simply exquisite.
These last few lectures have been more history based then action and art based. While I understand that it is important to know where artists are branching form and how the world culture and our country has developed, I sometimes feel that these explanations drag on a bit. I really enjoyed the images from “Earth as Art” I felt as though these images bring to an audience as much visual appeal as awareness of their surroundings. These pictures are a great way to see landscapes that are foreign to most of us. I love the fact that actually, they are foreign to all of us through the way they are presented. “Earth as Art” makes me take a second look at a place so familiar. The video that we watched in discussion, of Diamond, was very dull. I felt like he was able to cover all of his main points within that brief lecture, and then, for whatever reason he decided to invest his time in a 500+ page book. I do enjoy all of what the book has to offer, and I feel it to be a fairly interesting read. I like that it is a diverse look on culture across the times and world. I like that this book doesn’t beat the same land over and over to squeeze out an experience. However, I feel that while the research within his book is admirable, it is long. The chapters are a long read on their own. I certainly enjoy his reading far more then having to listen to him, but I feel he could make a compromise between the two. I would like to see him get a little more energy and try to sell his book to the audience by sharing more information along a shot of caffeine, and then maybe condense what he wants to say within his writing. I am able to catch the drift about civilizations failing after the first two flopped.
Anita Sidler Lecture: I really enjoyed some of the satellite images in today’s lecture. Most of all, I liked the images of amount of lights in different areas of the world. I felt like it made an impact on my especially seeing north and south Korea. Whenever I make a new Korean friend I often ask them about north Korea, and they often answer that there isn’t much to say because they don’t see them. Ever. I felt that the other images made interesting abstract paintings, but it didn’t make any interest to me because they didn’t look like anything at all. I feel like if we use pictures to convince others, then take the simple picture of a glacier from 10 years ago, and take one today in the same spot. From a design to convince people perspective, I think it’s the way to go. Although, I feel a little angry about photoshop, because everything is photoshopped today. What can we trust now?
I wish we could explore more eco-artist to see what and why they are doing the work they do. I feel like we quickly glanced over some of their work, but I’d really like to see maybe an art21 episode on one of them to see and hear what they have to say. Perhaps we can focus on one of them artists for a bit before moving on.
Artist: Speaking of photoshopped, I think this artist uses too much of it. When too much is used, I feel that it loses its value or something. I know that is a harsh thing to say, but I really love seeing amazing photographs taken straight up. I also felt that the colors of the photos were too neutral. I think it sets them all in a certain old feeling mood, and also has congruency but I looked at all the photos, and none of them stuck out to me.
It seems that as of late we have been bombarded with pictures of earth. I mean more so than we usually are. Not that I have a problem with this; it is simply an observation. I think that our earth is really beautiful and I sincerely enjoy looking at it in both artistic and documentary formats. In lecture today, I think the line between these two portrayals of our world was blurred. Joe mentioned Bradford Washburn, a mapmaker and explorer who called himself a photographer. Although he was taking photos to document the land for governmental purposes, the images he took were absolutely stunning. This just goes to show that our environment, the landscapes we are surrounded by, serves as art in its own, raw form. His photos reminded me somewhat of Ansel Adams’ work. The landscapes are just so incredibly epic, yet so real it’s astonishing. Beth Dow’s photography is also reminiscent of Ansel Adams. Like Adams and Washburn, she chooses raw nature as her subject-unadulterated by man’s eager hands. However, her work is somewhat subtler. Rather than focus on the epic proportions and incredible scenes of our earth’s natural formations, she finds naturally occurring sculptures and arrangements. Most of her photos are so simple, yet nevertheless are very striking. One thing I notice a lot of these nature photographers have in common is a lack of color. I know some of this has to do with the technology of the times, but even in modern portfolios such as Dow’s we see a reoccurring theme of sepia and black and white tones. I think this really gives our earth a very stern characterization. For me at least, seeing these natural formations in monotones forces me to take it more seriously. It’s like a stoic portrait of someone of great power; respectable and awe inspiring. The remote sensing pictures Joe showed us during the second half of lecture shed a completely different light on the earth. While still very beautiful and awe inspiring, the bright colors and bold patterns naturally created by the land aroused a different feeling towards my home planet. Honestly, it made it seem more fun. Although our images of the earth can be quite pristine, impressive, and contemplative at times, other visual representations can definitely be very stimulating through bold portrayals of our earth’s outrageous colors and contours. I’m not sure which type of art I like more. My point is, earth is art!
Beth Dow’s work was really beautiful. In her portfolio I loved how everything was completely surreal yet strangely familiar. Had the buildings in the images not been so recognizable, I might have thought that they could have been actual photographs. I really loved the Pizzaz photo especially; I thought that image was particularly successful in transforming this historical, beautiful, piece of art into a superficial backdrop of tourism and consumption. In her other work in the garden portfolio it was amazing to see how humans can transform the environment so much to be completely surreal. The garden images contrary to the other portfolio I looked at had really no sense of familiarity, which made me very uncomfortable, because I could tell that these places actually exist. It was really unsettling. I think its lovely how she’s presenting our world to us and showing how our reality has changed and questioning our obsessive control over environment. Also notice how nothing is living in these images, there is no animals or things that live in that environment. In the collapse book when reading about the collapse of the Nordic Viking civilization in the 1400’s I couldn’t help but think to modern methods of farming today. Desertification, erosion, and loss of vegetation and biodiversity are a huge problem all over the world when it comes to farming, so why haven’t we started to change those practices? I understand that there is a need to grow food to feed our ever-growing population, but if these problems have persisted for hundreds of years and consistently lead to the downfall of civilizations and environment, why haven’t we put more energy into changing these practices? I was surprised when I read that a few hundred years later in Greenland, they’ve tried to continue keeping animals in an environment that has never been successful at supporting life for livestock. Even after this is apparent, the government still pushes people to pursue sheep farming? This lack of respect for environment is present as well in Haiti. Although Haiti’s source of decline is more complex than that of the Vikings, it is undoubtedly obvious that with decline of environment due to the desire to use your resources to get wealthy now, comes collapse. This should be alarming to the world because we are relying on a finite resource, oil, and not researching enough alternative energy sources which can secure our future.
When I read about the fate of the Norse Vikings, it really struck a chord with me. America has pretty much gone down the same path as them including the strict adherence to appear European. We have ignored and scoffed at the traditions of different Native American groups, who knew more of the land we were settling than we did, and as a result we completely transformed the landscape. We have depleted much of our natural resources, and although we have survived thus far, who's to say that we won't end up destroying our civilization like the Norse vikings did? It's not only the Native American culture that we ignore, but most immigrant cultures as well. In the past we have had policies to assimilate immigrants into our culture (basically the whole melting pot ideal) and said 'be like us or get the hell out'. There has definitely been a leap in acceptance of different cultures, but we still enforce American ideals on them, that if they don't adapt to, will not allow them to survive in the US. For instance, speaking English. Countries such as Austria speak many different languages to accommodate the different cultural groups which is how they have survived as a country for so long. We do not have that tolerance, and it may lead to our downfall. Well, long story short we should ignore the example the Norse vikings set and learn from different cultures, taking the best of their ideas on how to preserve our civilization.
Matthew Acomb The idea that the role of the artist is to be a filter for peoples understanding of the world is something I find interesting. I agree with this idea, but I don’t think it is very effective if the work that is produced is clearly intended to promote awareness. Most of the work we looked at in class did not take this aggressive approach, but instead gave a different perspective without forcing anything on you. I don’t really think that artwork should be produced with the intention of the artist being to say some specific message. Instead, I think the artist should try to show the audience their perspective of the world without trying to persuade them of anything specific. For instance, if an artist does not like war and likes peace, he or she should create a piece that shows people how war is bad and why piece is good. This lets people know how other people perceive the world. If people are exposed to other perspectives, they can strengthen their own. It is not enough to tell people that war is bad we need peace. People need to be able to form their own feelings on a subject in order to act on it. An effective piece of artwork will give the audience the means to understand their feelings on a subject rather than just telling them what to do or relying on shock value. Many issues that are addressed in art do not have easy solutions and if all artwork is obvious then peoples minds will be corrupted into thinking that there is a quick solution to everything when this is not the case.
I did not enjoy the work of this week’s artist. I found looking through all of her portfolios a tedious task. Not many of her highly detailed prints actually impressed me. Her photos seemed overly manipulated, which I believe is against some of the points she is trying to make with her statements. She said that her fieldwork portfolio was the “bones of life laid bare” but I feel like she gave us more and more visual information rather than presenting us with the truth of the situation. I also find her a bit unappealing in her written personality. She writes “I used the serendipity of a walk to find meaning in the quietest seasons,” but I don’t believe that she is one to give meaning to the winters. It is an extremely personal relationship, that between someone and nature. She is not one to instill a universal meaning to the seasons. It isolates the viewer from the work. I find it odd that while she tries to invoke different things with her work, she keeps her technique the same. She is trying to say separate ideas about the fieldwork and the gardens but she photographs them the same. She never compares the two or gives reasoning for keeping with the same boring aesthetic. She expects us to sit quietly while she takes the easy way out. Exploring different visual aspects would give a challenge to her. She doesn’t have to stray far from it, but just enough to show that she is really considering what her style says about her photographs.
I really enjoyed Joe’s lecture about evolution today. Understanding populations, the amount of species on the planet, and just how fast those species are going extinct really puts things into perspective. We are only one species out of millions and yet we gall to think that we are better than everything else. Animals, bugs, birds, and all sorts of different species are going extinct faster than ever thanks to humans. In the natural world species evolve and compete, and go extinct everyday. Most of the time this happens gradually and does not cause an entire ecosystem to fall apart. We are changing the climate, introducing nonnative species, and destroying the environment at an alarming rate. If this continues the range of diversity of life on the planet will shrink a significant amount and may end up causing more damage than we can conceive right now. Evolution can no longer keep up with our ever-increasing rate of destruction. Speaking of destruction, I found this to be something that was prevalent in Beth Dow’s work. While looking at her series on gardens, I noticed a lack of diversity in the plants. Most gardens use very few plants and manipulate them to a point there they look more man made than natural. I really don’t understand the point of having a manicured lawn dotted with things that may at one have been bushes or trees, but are now symmetrical and orderly. The way that Dow photographs them is orderly and symmetrical as well. Nature is about survival. It is not meant to look nice and be placed in someone’s yard like a decoration. Some of these gardens also take up an exorbitant amount of space; Space that they will probably only ever look at, and not even walk though. All of this wasted space could be used to for better causes, best of all being left alone so that we stop crowding out native species that have no where else to go.
During this Thanksgiving, I had the opportunity to reflect on just the amount that we consume during the holidays. Just to give you a rough estimate, three Russian families gather together to spread the holiday cheer and enjoy one another’s company. Over the course of four hours, we smoked over a pack of cigarettes, ate sixty dollar worth turkey, created and ate over two hundred dollars worth of salads and appetizers, and left the table with roughly six or seven bottles of vodka, cognac, and wine. In one night, including also the preparation costs of gathering everyone together, we spent roughly one thousand dollars. The most fascinating part of this endeavor is just how easily and acceptable we spent that money. When putting all of these purchases in perspective, we spent more on one meal than most spend in a year in developing countries. This was the first time I went shopping on Black Friday. My sister dragged me out of the house around ten o-clock in the morning to take advantage of all of the glamorous sales happening throughout the entire day. I was slightly overwhelmed by the vast amount of people crowding the halls of the mall. I usually only experience this type of congestion during a football game or a traffic jam. We then walked into the H & M at Great Lakes Crossing. When you walk in, the selection (especially the women’s section) is almost overwhelming. The entire selection of garments is based by the month. This means that the entire clothing stock changes twelve time out of the year. The store is then organized by color. Within each color section, there is a vast combination of outfits. You can find a blouse in ten different colors and many more variations within those colors. In a nutshell, when a girl announces that she can’t find anything in the store, it is not because there is ever a small selection of clothing, but because our selection is so vast that we have the ability to discern between outfits. Often times, a girl will buy an outfit to wear once to a particular event and then put that outfit to the very end of her wardrobe. At which point she again announces that she has nothing to wear and then proceeds to the nearest designer store to restock her monthly apparel. I am of course no exclusion to this trend of shopping. Of course, I do not do this to such an extent and only find myself in a store every so often; I have a hard time wearing something that I wore the winter beforehand. I find those articles of clothing to be tacky and outdated from the previous year and proceed to buy a new set of clothes… mostly because I can afford it.
Chapter 10 of collapse really sparked my interest this week. I had a little prior knowledge on the conflict in Rwanda because I watched Hotel Rwanda in class a few years ago and I was deeply disturbed and did a little research. The film only provided a small bit of back-story and discussed the age-old tensions between Hutu and Tutsi that stemmed from class separations, even though there was little reason for the segregation in the first place. This, when combined with the lack of space and food, clearly creates an explosive situation. The movie had a Hutu bias and didn’t address the issue of land at all. Many of the graphic scenes gave detailed depictions of horrific and numerous deaths. I felt worked up after the movie and couldn’t understand why the US stood idly by while mass genocide occurred. Why hadn’t there been more media coverage or information about the issue when it was happening rather than after the fact? Since then, and since reading this chapter I have many more thoughts on the topic. I was surprised to find out the people of Rwanda felt the genocide was a necessary means of population control. I can’t imagine that in the heat of the violence people would have seen the death in any sort of positive light but in retrospect, it certainly freed up some land. I know it’s a dark thought but is that our destination? Our population grows until we can no longer support the number of lives because we have exploited our resources and space? And is it ok to just let it happen because the long-term result may benefit society as a whole?
Over Thanksgiving break I was thinking about how it seems that all our holidays have to do with consuming things whether it’s material things like presents or food. Thanksgiving is the biggest food one all you do is eat until your stuffed. But we don’t just eat anything most of us eat the traditional thanksgiving food like turkey, mashed potatoes, gravy, cranberry’s and pumpkin pie. I have noticed that because of this consuming that some of the holiday’s have become less about there true meaning and more about just consuming what society has defined us to consume. Granted I love the holiday’s but shouldn’t we be thankful for every meal we have with our family whether it’s Thanksgiving or not?
ReplyDeleteChristmas seems to be all about the presents. We all have to go out and shop generally purchasing things we don’t need but it’s Christmas we have to buy stuff. To me it makes more sense to buy stuff on a need/want bases. Like if I need a new jacket I just go out then and get it why wait for a holiday to purchase something. I find shopping during the holidays to be a hassle. Yet when I go any other time I enjoy it. This year when it came time to make my list this year I was like what do I need and nothing came to mind. I really didn’t know of anything I really wanted my list was blank but my Mom and Grandma were like we need your list. So I ended up making two list full of bunch of stuff that will be nice to have but none of which I needed or really even wanted. I for the first time felt forced to want stuff because not wanting anything was unacceptable it’s Christmas you have to get stuff. Then when I was doing my shopping for my sister she wanted this stuffed animal and it like pained me to buy it because I know that she has like 100 stuffed animals does she really need another one. Yet, I bought it and she will get it and like for like a couple and then forget about it. I think I might be turning into the Grinch. But I feel like out society is under the belief that if go along with the tradition of consuming that makes you good but if you don’t that makes you a bad person.
Andrew Hainen
ReplyDeleteADP III :: James Rotz
Weekly Statement :: Tuesday December 1st, 2009
This week in lecture, we really just talked about some history and a few people who changed the world with their inventions. Great to know, but kind of hard to use, let alone comment with an opinion on. I didn’t get a chance to ask questions about Collapse this week in discussion though, so I will take this time to comment now.
We were supposed to cover the first 9 chapters and discuss them in class. I was going to lead discussion, and I actually learned about the different societies that fell and are no longer. The primary example used was how the Norse came into Greenland and took over. Diamond explains how they 100% disregarded the culture of Greenland and ravaged the land. Don’t know how to pass an opinion on that, but in the end, people are out to survive and did a pretty good job of it. Sure, they ruined the land and their society collapsed, but to take over a land in the arctic, actually colonize it, and to function would take a lot of work and skill.
I continued to read about the Mayans and formed one of my questions off of that, thinking if something could happen like that; if some sort of society could collapse so quickly that people wouldn’t know what happened. I thought that things like that just didn’t happen today, that countries and peoples were here to stay. Then in class, we started discussing modern day collapses, in which Nazi Germany, and the Soviet Union came up, and totally caught me off guard. I was completely thinking the wrong mindset, I was only considering environmental collapses or collapses with great societies being decimated. But with the USSR and Germany, their political structure and methods totally ended them in a matter of days or a few years.
I began thinking about America then, if we would collapse in my lifetime. It’s going to happen, it’s inevitable. We just don’t realize how short we’ve been around in relative terms. One of the oldest civilizations was the Byzantine Empire and Constantinople, which lasted over 1000 years but is hardly discussed in classes. Yet, America is coming up on 150 years and we feel like the oldest nation ever. I personally think we won’t have a chance to get to an environmental collapse, the world has too much of a chip on it’s shoulder from us and could possibly come back to get us.
Marian Perez
ReplyDeleteADP III
11/29/09
What I can remember distinctly from last week’s lecture was those amazing willow structures. They just looked so beautiful on the slides and they were so well built, I actually was curious to know more about their construction. Over the break I saw some Christmas decorations at Michaels made out of tree branches and thought about the willow structures from class and how tiny versions would look really cool for Christmas. I also recall the inventions mentioned and was shocked about how steam was originally used to pump water out of coalmines. I don’t like stories of coalmines or the history but it was a good point to make about how steam was used in places other then on trains.
What I thought about Jared Diamond’s video lecture in discussion was that it is no wonder such a boring man was capable of writing such a book as Collapse. It was very interesting to actually see him talk and get to know what he looked like, not to mention his hair was really funny. The way he spoke through out the whole video was very boring and not attention grabbing at all. A lot of the things he says are good points, I especially like how he talks about the Mayans in the book, but he tends to ramble on and on. Even his body language and eyes were not concentrated on what he was saying and doing, he pretty much repeats the introduction of his novel. It was a lot better to hear his main points behind the book coming out of his own mouth; it explains how the book is constructed more clearly. I would have liked for him to have talked about how he thought people would accept his book or how he thinks it is doing know that it has been published. Does he really feel accomplished or disappointed?
Looking through Beth Dow’s work was very inspiring and attention grabbing. I love the mystery and gyres in her photography. The nature aspect to her work is not cliché or boring, but instead is faltering. The leaves and flowers captured in her work almost look like statues or even monuments that are not supposed to be touched. All her trees are almost mystical in their stance and look like granite arms reaching out into the air. The few photographs with people in them look like olden times images at first glance, but then fall into place of a modern time because of the clothes they are wearing.
My favorite section of her work was “In the Garden” because of the cool but enjoyable solitude depicted in the locations. The images have a Victorian style that I personally have always liked. The garden is English and Italian and it does come across in the shapes the trees are growing in and the fountains or statues seen. I would like to see her work feature more status with people in them in a compare and contrast sort of set up to see how her style comes across. Also seeing her do more images in color would be cool to see because of the way her style or objects would change in her work.
Trisha Previte
ReplyDeleteADP III: James Rotz
I have to say, the image posted on this week’s statement definitely intrigued me, and so I decided to delve further into the online portfolio of Beth Dow. What I discovered is a breath-taking collection of unexpectedly emotional photography. Her portfolio titled Fieldwork particularly entranced me, with its delicate display of natural heartache and splendor. The portfolio is filled with images of nature - nature on the verge of death, nature manipulated, nature abused, nature at its most ominous, and most importantly, nature alive despite all this. The black and white effect on all of her photos enhances their poignancy and helps distinguish the themes of damage and isolation present throughout this particular set of photos. The undeniable attractiveness of these photographs paves the way for a clash of interest, a tension between their mysterious beauty and the quiet tragedy clearly unfolding throughout these simple images. Many images are just of rocks, dead tree stumps or abandoned dirt roads, but through her telling eye, Dow captures the magnificence of each scene. Furthermore, her manipulation of the frame in creating unique compositions is very compelling. For instance, the subject matter of the image titled Three Rocks may lurk on the edge of the frame, but as a result the white empty void left in the middle of the piece takes on its own beauty and presence.
Despite how much I like and appreciate Dow’s work, I would love to see a few certain elements manipulated, if simply for the love of experiment. First, I wonder how she would fair with color in her pictures. While the black and white is ominously enchanting, it would be interesting to see what type of life or new meaning each photo were to take on if introduced to some tone. Lastly I find the delicate contrast of her original photos soulful, but I would not mind seeing an increase in that contrast on only a few of her pictures to see how the new bolder mood would interact with the subject matter. Other than these few ponderings though, Beth Dow’s photography is simply exquisite.
Amber Harrison
ReplyDelete12/01/2009
These last few lectures have been more history based then action and art based. While I understand that it is important to know where artists are branching form and how the world culture and our country has developed, I sometimes feel that these explanations drag on a bit. I really enjoyed the images from “Earth as Art” I felt as though these images bring to an audience as much visual appeal as awareness of their surroundings. These pictures are a great way to see landscapes that are foreign to most of us. I love the fact that actually, they are foreign to all of us through the way they are presented. “Earth as Art” makes me take a second look at a place so familiar.
The video that we watched in discussion, of Diamond, was very dull. I felt like he was able to cover all of his main points within that brief lecture, and then, for whatever reason he decided to invest his time in a 500+ page book. I do enjoy all of what the book has to offer, and I feel it to be a fairly interesting read. I like that it is a diverse look on culture across the times and world. I like that this book doesn’t beat the same land over and over to squeeze out an experience. However, I feel that while the research within his book is admirable, it is long. The chapters are a long read on their own. I certainly enjoy his reading far more then having to listen to him, but I feel he could make a compromise between the two. I would like to see him get a little more energy and try to sell his book to the audience by sharing more information along a shot of caffeine, and then maybe condense what he wants to say within his writing. I am able to catch the drift about civilizations failing after the first two flopped.
Anita Sidler
ReplyDeleteLecture:
I really enjoyed some of the satellite images in today’s lecture. Most of all, I liked the images of amount of lights in different areas of the world. I felt like it made an impact on my especially seeing north and south Korea. Whenever I make a new Korean friend I often ask them about north Korea, and they often answer that there isn’t much to say because they don’t see them. Ever. I felt that the other images made interesting abstract paintings, but it didn’t make any interest to me because they didn’t look like anything at all. I feel like if we use pictures to convince others, then take the simple picture of a glacier from 10 years ago, and take one today in the same spot. From a design to convince people perspective, I think it’s the way to go. Although, I feel a little angry about photoshop, because everything is photoshopped today. What can we trust now?
I wish we could explore more eco-artist to see what and why they are doing the work they do. I feel like we quickly glanced over some of their work, but I’d really like to see maybe an art21 episode on one of them to see and hear what they have to say. Perhaps we can focus on one of them artists for a bit before moving on.
Artist:
Speaking of photoshopped, I think this artist uses too much of it. When too much is used, I feel that it loses its value or something. I know that is a harsh thing to say, but I really love seeing amazing photographs taken straight up. I also felt that the colors of the photos were too neutral. I think it sets them all in a certain old feeling mood, and also has congruency but I looked at all the photos, and none of them stuck out to me.
Brijit Spencer
ReplyDeleteADP III
James Rotz
12.01.09
It seems that as of late we have been bombarded with pictures of earth. I mean more so than we usually are. Not that I have a problem with this; it is simply an observation. I think that our earth is really beautiful and I sincerely enjoy looking at it in both artistic and documentary formats. In lecture today, I think the line between these two portrayals of our world was blurred. Joe mentioned Bradford Washburn, a mapmaker and explorer who called himself a photographer. Although he was taking photos to document the land for governmental purposes, the images he took were absolutely stunning. This just goes to show that our environment, the landscapes we are surrounded by, serves as art in its own, raw form. His photos reminded me somewhat of Ansel Adams’ work. The landscapes are just so incredibly epic, yet so real it’s astonishing.
Beth Dow’s photography is also reminiscent of Ansel Adams. Like Adams and Washburn, she chooses raw nature as her subject-unadulterated by man’s eager hands. However, her work is somewhat subtler. Rather than focus on the epic proportions and incredible scenes of our earth’s natural formations, she finds naturally occurring sculptures and arrangements. Most of her photos are so simple, yet nevertheless are very striking. One thing I notice a lot of these nature photographers have in common is a lack of color. I know some of this has to do with the technology of the times, but even in modern portfolios such as Dow’s we see a reoccurring theme of sepia and black and white tones. I think this really gives our earth a very stern characterization. For me at least, seeing these natural formations in monotones forces me to take it more seriously. It’s like a stoic portrait of someone of great power; respectable and awe inspiring.
The remote sensing pictures Joe showed us during the second half of lecture shed a completely different light on the earth. While still very beautiful and awe inspiring, the bright colors and bold patterns naturally created by the land aroused a different feeling towards my home planet. Honestly, it made it seem more fun. Although our images of the earth can be quite pristine, impressive, and contemplative at times, other visual representations can definitely be very stimulating through bold portrayals of our earth’s outrageous colors and contours. I’m not sure which type of art I like more. My point is, earth is art!
Beth Dow’s work was really beautiful. In her portfolio I loved how everything was completely surreal yet strangely familiar. Had the buildings in the images not been so recognizable, I might have thought that they could have been actual photographs. I really loved the Pizzaz photo especially; I thought that image was particularly successful in transforming this historical, beautiful, piece of art into a superficial backdrop of tourism and consumption. In her other work in the garden portfolio it was amazing to see how humans can transform the environment so much to be completely surreal. The garden images contrary to the other portfolio I looked at had really no sense of familiarity, which made me very uncomfortable, because I could tell that these places actually exist. It was really unsettling. I think its lovely how she’s presenting our world to us and showing how our reality has changed and questioning our obsessive control over environment. Also notice how nothing is living in these images, there is no animals or things that live in that environment.
ReplyDeleteIn the collapse book when reading about the collapse of the Nordic Viking civilization in the 1400’s I couldn’t help but think to modern methods of farming today. Desertification, erosion, and loss of vegetation and biodiversity are a huge problem all over the world when it comes to farming, so why haven’t we started to change those practices? I understand that there is a need to grow food to feed our ever-growing population, but if these problems have persisted for hundreds of years and consistently lead to the downfall of civilizations and environment, why haven’t we put more energy into changing these practices? I was surprised when I read that a few hundred years later in Greenland, they’ve tried to continue keeping animals in an environment that has never been successful at supporting life for livestock. Even after this is apparent, the government still pushes people to pursue sheep farming? This lack of respect for environment is present as well in Haiti. Although Haiti’s source of decline is more complex than that of the Vikings, it is undoubtedly obvious that with decline of environment due to the desire to use your resources to get wealthy now, comes collapse. This should be alarming to the world because we are relying on a finite resource, oil, and not researching enough alternative energy sources which can secure our future.
When I read about the fate of the Norse Vikings, it really struck a chord with me. America has pretty much gone down the same path as them including the strict adherence to appear European. We have ignored and scoffed at the traditions of different Native American groups, who knew more of the land we were settling than we did, and as a result we completely transformed the landscape. We have depleted much of our natural resources, and although we have survived thus far, who's to say that we won't end up destroying our civilization like the Norse vikings did?
ReplyDeleteIt's not only the Native American culture that we ignore, but most immigrant cultures as well. In the past we have had policies to assimilate immigrants into our culture (basically the whole melting pot ideal) and said 'be like us or get the hell out'. There has definitely been a leap in acceptance of different cultures, but we still enforce American ideals on them, that if they don't adapt to, will not allow them to survive in the US. For instance, speaking English. Countries such as Austria speak many different languages to accommodate the different cultural groups which is how they have survived as a country for so long. We do not have that tolerance, and it may lead to our downfall.
Well, long story short we should ignore the example the Norse vikings set and learn from different cultures, taking the best of their ideas on how to preserve our civilization.
Matthew Acomb
ReplyDeleteThe idea that the role of the artist is to be a filter for peoples understanding of the world is something I find interesting. I agree with this idea, but I don’t think it is very effective if the work that is produced is clearly intended to promote awareness. Most of the work we looked at in class did not take this aggressive approach, but instead gave a different perspective without forcing anything on you. I don’t really think that artwork should be produced with the intention of the artist being to say some specific message. Instead, I think the artist should try to show the audience their perspective of the world without trying to persuade them of anything specific. For instance, if an artist does not like war and likes peace, he or she should create a piece that shows people how war is bad and why piece is good. This lets people know how other people perceive the world. If people are exposed to other perspectives, they can strengthen their own. It is not enough to tell people that war is bad we need peace. People need to be able to form their own feelings on a subject in order to act on it. An effective piece of artwork will give the audience the means to understand their feelings on a subject rather than just telling them what to do or relying on shock value. Many issues that are addressed in art do not have easy solutions and if all artwork is obvious then peoples minds will be corrupted into thinking that there is a quick solution to everything when this is not the case.
Dana Pierfelice
ReplyDeleteADP 3
I did not enjoy the work of this week’s artist. I found looking through all of her portfolios a tedious task. Not many of her highly detailed prints actually impressed me. Her photos seemed overly manipulated, which I believe is against some of the points she is trying to make with her statements. She said that her fieldwork portfolio was the “bones of life laid bare” but I feel like she gave us more and more visual information rather than presenting us with the truth of the situation. I also find her a bit unappealing in her written personality. She writes “I used the serendipity of a walk to find meaning in the quietest seasons,” but I don’t believe that she is one to give meaning to the winters. It is an extremely personal relationship, that between someone and nature. She is not one to instill a universal meaning to the seasons. It isolates the viewer from the work.
I find it odd that while she tries to invoke different things with her work, she keeps her technique the same. She is trying to say separate ideas about the fieldwork and the gardens but she photographs them the same. She never compares the two or gives reasoning for keeping with the same boring aesthetic. She expects us to sit quietly while she takes the easy way out. Exploring different visual aspects would give a challenge to her. She doesn’t have to stray far from it, but just enough to show that she is really considering what her style says about her photographs.
Shelby Roback
ReplyDeleteADP III
I really enjoyed Joe’s lecture about evolution today. Understanding populations, the amount of species on the planet, and just how fast those species are going extinct really puts things into perspective. We are only one species out of millions and yet we gall to think that we are better than everything else. Animals, bugs, birds, and all sorts of different species are going extinct faster than ever thanks to humans. In the natural world species evolve and compete, and go extinct everyday. Most of the time this happens gradually and does not cause an entire ecosystem to fall apart. We are changing the climate, introducing nonnative species, and destroying the environment at an alarming rate. If this continues the range of diversity of life on the planet will shrink a significant amount and may end up causing more damage than we can conceive right now. Evolution can no longer keep up with our ever-increasing rate of destruction.
Speaking of destruction, I found this to be something that was prevalent in Beth Dow’s work. While looking at her series on gardens, I noticed a lack of diversity in the plants. Most gardens use very few plants and manipulate them to a point there they look more man made than natural. I really don’t understand the point of having a manicured lawn dotted with things that may at one have been bushes or trees, but are now symmetrical and orderly. The way that Dow photographs them is orderly and symmetrical as well. Nature is about survival. It is not meant to look nice and be placed in someone’s yard like a decoration. Some of these gardens also take up an exorbitant amount of space; Space that they will probably only ever look at, and not even walk though. All of this wasted space could be used to for better causes, best of all being left alone so that we stop crowding out native species that have no where else to go.
During this Thanksgiving, I had the opportunity to reflect on just the amount that we consume during the holidays. Just to give you a rough estimate, three Russian families gather together to spread the holiday cheer and enjoy one another’s company. Over the course of four hours, we smoked over a pack of cigarettes, ate sixty dollar worth turkey, created and ate over two hundred dollars worth of salads and appetizers, and left the table with roughly six or seven bottles of vodka, cognac, and wine. In one night, including also the preparation costs of gathering everyone together, we spent roughly one thousand dollars. The most fascinating part of this endeavor is just how easily and acceptable we spent that money. When putting all of these purchases in perspective, we spent more on one meal than most spend in a year in developing countries.
ReplyDeleteThis was the first time I went shopping on Black Friday. My sister dragged me out of the house around ten o-clock in the morning to take advantage of all of the glamorous sales happening throughout the entire day. I was slightly overwhelmed by the vast amount of people crowding the halls of the mall. I usually only experience this type of congestion during a football game or a traffic jam.
We then walked into the H & M at Great Lakes Crossing. When you walk in, the selection (especially the women’s section) is almost overwhelming. The entire selection of garments is based by the month. This means that the entire clothing stock changes twelve time out of the year. The store is then organized by color. Within each color section, there is a vast combination of outfits. You can find a blouse in ten different colors and many more variations within those colors. In a nutshell, when a girl announces that she can’t find anything in the store, it is not because there is ever a small selection of clothing, but because our selection is so vast that we have the ability to discern between outfits. Often times, a girl will buy an outfit to wear once to a particular event and then put that outfit to the very end of her wardrobe. At which point she again announces that she has nothing to wear and then proceeds to the nearest designer store to restock her monthly apparel. I am of course no exclusion to this trend of shopping. Of course, I do not do this to such an extent and only find myself in a store every so often; I have a hard time wearing something that I wore the winter beforehand. I find those articles of clothing to be tacky and outdated from the previous year and proceed to buy a new set of clothes… mostly because I can afford it.
Chapter 10 of collapse really sparked my interest this week. I had a little prior knowledge on the conflict in Rwanda because I watched Hotel Rwanda in class a few years ago and I was deeply disturbed and did a little research. The film only provided a small bit of back-story and discussed the age-old tensions between Hutu and Tutsi that stemmed from class separations, even though there was little reason for the segregation in the first place. This, when combined with the lack of space and food, clearly creates an explosive situation. The movie had a Hutu bias and didn’t address the issue of land at all. Many of the graphic scenes gave detailed depictions of horrific and numerous deaths. I felt worked up after the movie and couldn’t understand why the US stood idly by while mass genocide occurred. Why hadn’t there been more media coverage or information about the issue when it was happening rather than after the fact? Since then, and since reading this chapter I have many more thoughts on the topic. I was surprised to find out the people of Rwanda felt the genocide was a necessary means of population control. I can’t imagine that in the heat of the violence people would have seen the death in any sort of positive light but in retrospect, it certainly freed up some land. I know it’s a dark thought but is that our destination? Our population grows until we can no longer support the number of lives because we have exploited our resources and space? And is it ok to just let it happen because the long-term result may benefit society as a whole?
ReplyDelete