Blog Assignment #3, ch 4

"Vision is a process."
Through reading the chapter, what interested me the most (surprisingly) was the concept of Claude Monet's impressionism. Also, from impressionism stems a variety of different theories and point of views. The basis behind impressionism is to present an image that represents the ongoing movement of light and color. This type of art introduces the idea that art doesn't have to capture a moment in time, like a photograph would. Instead of portraying a specific instance, an impressionist piece focuses on the action of sight. This type of art makes a statement about the process of looking. Claude Monet, in particular, created several paintings of one specific scene, only in each painting he portrayed the scene in a different context. He would paint one scene at different times of the day, or at different times entirely. Examples of these paintings included his scenes of water lillies at the Rouen Cathedral, scenes of the Gare St. Lazare train station, and scenes of the garden in Giverny. By painting the same scene at different times, Monet shows how a scene can be affected by light and weather. Also, specifically in his paintings of the Gare St. Lazare train station, Monet captures the frantic pace of a newly-industrialized town. From his pieces a viewer can gain insight to how complex human vision can be. This concept is closely related with that of Cubism. By presenting different vantage points in one painting, Cubists were sending the message that the human eye is always in motion; the eye never rests.
During Monday's class we were discussing different influential artists. One of the artists we discussed was Vincent Van Gogh. Van Gogh had a very specific, yet unique style of painting. His signature style consisted of heavy layers, distinct swirls and brush strokes, and vivid color. What is unknown is the motivation behind his works. One theory suggests that he was trying to capture light and movement in his pieces. That theory definately makes sense, but it seems almost too simple. As everyone knows, there are several myths regarding Van Gogh's mental state. From those myths, another theory was introduced. If his mental health was as bad as some myths suggest, it seems possible to suggest that maybe Van Gogh pianted his portraits according to how he percieved them. Though we only discussed this theory briefly, this idea really stuck in my head. Some could say that Van Gogh's pieces are products of hallucination. Personally, I'd like to think that his unique perspective was a result of an over-active imagination. When we talk about influential artists we often discuss how they were the first to introduce a certain style of art: artists such as Picasso and Braque, Warhol and Pollock, Da Vinci and Michelangelo. We admire these artists not only for their artwork, but also for providing us with anternative ways to look at the world around us. In this sense, we refer to these artists as advanced. In some cases the artwork itself doesn't seem advanced; this arguement is often used against Warhol and Pollock. However, sometimes an artist creates a "simple" piece in order to convey a specific message without any distractions. So, in regards to an artist's thought process, isn't it possible to see Van Gogh in the same light? While I personally feel that the work of Van Gogh is more complex than that of Jackson Pollock and Andy Warhol, Van Gogh still has a bad reputation amongst some critics. Maybe Van Gogh was insane. Maybe he was brilliant. It is just an interesting way to look at things. Maybe the works of some artists serve as representations of how they view the world. This idea definately questions the concept of realism. The imagery in "Starry Night" may not be how we see the world, but maybe that is how Van Gogh saw it. It's a stretch, but maybe Van Gogh painted according to his other senses, not just according to what he actually saw.
As both Cubism and Impressionism illustrated, vision is a process. In a way, Van Gogh is making a similar statement. By using such heavy texture Van Gogh brings life to his portraits. In "Starry Night" he gives the illusion of movement. It is so vivid that one could easily imagine the scene changing right in front of them; this is the same idea behind Monet's paintings. Scenery is subject to change. Real life images can't stay the same forever. It first glance, the works of these artists seem simple. Picasso and Braque's artwork may just seem weird at first. The work of Monet and Van Gogh may be simple described as "pretty". However, the complexity of piece lies beneath. Underneath the piece lie the hard questions. What is the message behind this? What does the artist want us to focus on? What do we see in the picture?
And maybe, most importantly, "Is this what our world really looks like?"

Blog Response #2

"Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep."

I do agree with the statement this quote is making. Creativity doesn't come out of control, or from having rigid guidelines of "perfection". Sometimes a mistake can be a way to learn. Other times a "mistake" can expose you to new things; sometimes you realize that you like something new by initially making a mistake. Creativity, in itself, means to stray outside the lines. To be creative means to do something that isn't routine, or traditional. Creativity means taking a different approach; this new approach may be something that no one has seen or heard before. Having said that, it can be deduced that an individual would be able to gain a new perspective through someone else's creative expression, or even their own. Also, to make a mistake, one must stray from what is customary to them, or it wouldn't be considered a mistake. So in that sense, it is concievable that in some instances creativity and making a mistake are directly related.
Another way to interpret this quote, in regards to art, would be to consider a viewer's perspective. The work of Pablo Picasso, for example, was highly criticized by those in his time. Even though his style was completely deliberate, some disregarded it as art just because it didn't fit traditional guidelines, or didn't look anything like the type of art they were used to viweing. Some of his critics during that time could have said that he made a mistake choosing to display that specific style of art. In this context, mistake takes on a different meaning. His mistake, according to his critics, could be that because of his unique style of art he wouldn't be appreciated as an artist. So, in this situation is mistake isn't related to the art really, but rather a mistake in regards to the social aspect. As history shows, he was able to prove these people wrong. Also, his art or "mistake" influenced other artists to work with other styles and variations of art, which paved the way for modern art.
Along with simply agreeing with this staement, I can apply this quote to my own life. I am a writer, or at least try to be. Some times I'm more of a writer than others, and vice versa. The way this quote applies to my writing is slightly different from the ways I mentioned above. How I use my mistakes in my writing is to actually write about them. As writer, for no particular reason, I gain my inspiration from the troubled times in my life. You will never seen any writing from me about good times, because when I'm in a happy period I'm out enjoying it rather than writing about it. I didn't choose to write this way, but it just seems that my inspiration is rooted from some sort of conflict. So, have confessed that, if you were to read any of my poetry or short stories you would see heavy descriptions of "mistakes" I've made, or how my reactions to the "mistakes" of others. Now, to give myself a little credit, that is not all my writing is about. However, it can be detected in my writing. So, in response to the second part of the quote, I write about the mistakes I chose to keep, or the mistakes that have meaning. Some mistakes may be considered trivial, but there are some mistakes that can be learned from. Sometimes a msitake can shape your personality or your outlook. While, it is possible for mistakes to have a negative impact on one's life, it is equally possible for some mistakes to have a positive influence. Personally, that is what my writing is about. My poetry reflects and soemtimes describes very clearly what type of person I am. Also, in addition to that, it outlines my experiences, my personal growth, and the things I've learned throughout my years. Also, on that train of thought, the second part of the quote can be translated as "knowing which ones to own up to". I don't believe that everyone has to admit to every little fault they have, or every little mistake. However, if a certain mistake has shaped someone's life in a positive way, he or she may not mind telling about it in order to illustrate the change that has come because of it. This is also seen in my personal writing. That is why this quote is meaningful to me, and also how it is applicable to my life.
So, this quote, for being relatively short, actually has a lot to say. It takes a little unpacking, but once it is internalized, the meaning behind can be somewhat profound (or at least I find it to be). For me, this quote is reassurring in the sense that others see that msitakes aren't all necessarily bad. It's just nice to know that others don't regard mistakes so harshly. In a way, the ability to make mistakes is one of the most human qualities a person can have.

Movie Response

I do agree with the theorists that suggest that Hitchcock was trying to create a mataphor with this film. It makes sense. When we watch a movie, especially in a theater, we are both figuratively and literally in the dark. In a literal sense, in a theater we actually sit in a dark room. In a figurative sense, we are "in the dark" in two ways. If we are seeing a movie for the first time, we are "in the dark" in regards to how the movie is going to play out, what the characters are going to do or say, and how the the movie is going to end. Also, as some theorists have suggested, we sit in the dark and watch the characters on the screen. It is obvious that the characters would not be able to see us, and that is the point. This symbolizes a sense of voyeurism. And in this sense, yes we are all voyeurs.
So yes, I will agree. I am a voyeur. And I don't really believe that there is anything wrong with a little voyeurism, as long as it is innocent, without any bad or perverted intentions of course! To me, voyeurism is a way to find out a little information of what is going on around you with out being detected or exposed. This could be a stretch, but it is possible to consider it a form of research. Hitchcock presented a great example with his film to support this idea. It's not everyday that you witness a murder in your neighborhood, bit there are everyday activities that go on within your neighbor that can give insight to the type of people that live around you. Personally, I think, to a certain extent, it is ok to notice what is going on around you or the type of you live around. For parents, a little voyeurism might help them gather enough information to ensure that their kids are safe roaming the neighborhood. Following along with that idea, voyeurism could potentially help anyone in gathering enough information to ensure their own safety and well-being. Voyeurism doesn't necessarily have to mean prying into the life of others, but simply being alert to the world around you.
So, in response to the statement, I don't mind admitting that I am a voyeur. I do not have any bad intentions, but I will admit that when I'm out, I do look around me, or "people watch". I am not embarassed, because I never look so far in depth into other peoples' lives to be considered perverted, nosy, or creepy (unless I detect that something seriously wrong is going on). In some ways, voyeurism can make things safer, as well as more interesting. And there isn't anything wrong with that!

Blog Assignment #1- Interpellation

Interpellation is a form of manipulation intended to interrupt a procedure in order to pose a question. In art, an image is created in order to convey a certain message. An artist could have several different motives behind producing a piece of art. Some artists create a piece of artwork in order to make a political statement, or in order to expose a certain social issue. In the advertisement industry an artist is hired to create an image that can be used to sell a product. Regardless of an artist's specific motive, the purpose behind art is to provoke contemplation. To be interpellated by an image is to realize that a piece of artwork is meant to be understood by those who view it. In simple terms, interpellation refers to how an image captivates a viewer's attention. To fully understand a piece is to take into account the medium the artists chooses to use, the environment in which an image is viewed, and the context of the image. It is implied that, in order to understand these aspects of a piece of artwork, an individual must agree to be an active spectator in that piece of art. Being a spectator involves more than just looking at an image. Being a spectator is a multimodal activity, that ivolves all five of the senses. Also, to be a spectator an individual must understand a piece of art in its full context, as well as understand himself or herself as a human subject. Not only must the spectator rely on his or her five senses, but must also use his or her own knowledge human society, experiences, and memories as a reference. A spectator's most useful tool in interpreting a piece of art is his or her gaze. Gaze, or the field of gaze, in this context, refers to the engagement in the activity of looking. In the field of gaze a spectator considers the social and historical context in which an image is created. Also, in the field of gaze, a spectator considers the notion of power and the idea of institution. The purpose behind art is to convince a viewer to do more than just look at an image. The purpose behind art is to invite an individual to actively participate in an image. By becoming more involved, an individual not only gets a better idea of what the piece of artwork is about, but also gets a better idea of who he or she is as a social human being.
An image that has greatly impacted me is the above promotional poster of the movie Remember the Titans. Naturally, I love the movie that this poster advertises, but the image itself sends an important message, just as the movie does. At a quick glance, this image contains a close-up of one man (the movie's protagonist, Denzel Washington) and a small clip of a running football player to the right side of the poster. The poster is dark and blurred around the edges, putting all attention on the center of the piece. From this, it is clear that the movie is about a football team. However, the clip of the player is set to the side purposely. In the very front of the image is a large close-up shot of one of the protagonist. What this tells me is that the person I should be focusing on, in both in the image and the movie, is that character. Thinking further on that notion, without even watching the movie, it can be assumed that this character is someone important; it could be inferred that this character is has both great potential and the obligation to make something of this potential. Also, the expression on his face supports this theory. The look on his face is disgruntled, implying that this character in faced with a stressful dilemma. However, even though he appears to be under some sort of pressure, there is a strong sense of determination and confidence in his expression. Another aspect to support this theory is the fact that he is not looking directly at the camera, but rather looking past the camera. His stare is directed almost outside of the picture, as if he were looking out on a landscape. This gives insight to his attitude, his sense of character. To me, this suggests a "me against the world" mindset. Only he doesn't seem scared, or swayed at all by this situation. From these signs, it can be inferred that this character is facing a serious issue; it suggests that maybe what this character is up against is something out of the ordinary, something momentous. Going back to the theory of expectations and potential, these hints also suggest that this character is a man of great capability.
The reason this poster holds such meaning to me is the overall meesage it sends. This poster promotes hope and motivation. This image promotes the ideal that individuals can make a difference. This represents ambition, strength, and the belief of positive change. From this picture I get a sense of reassurance; this image supports my own beliefs and my own desire for improvement. It's cheesy, I know. Regardless, this image has completely interpellated me. Through this, I am given a little insight to who I am, or who I would like to become eventually. Idealistic? Yes, very much so. But then again, so am I.