(no subject)
I just went to a special presentation at Gallery 101:
"Panel Presentation: Performance Art NOW, Kinga Araya (Montreal) and Paul Couillard, Fado Performance Inc. (Toronto):
A two-hour presentation focusing on current states of contemporary performance art practice, scheduled to coincide with the University of Ottawa students’ performance series (March 6-10)."
I thought it would tell me a bit more about performance art NOW, which I was interested to hear about; but for what I could tell it focused more on the artists' body of work. Unfortunately Kinga Araya's work didn't really interest me too much; and she was also not quite eloquent about what it really meant, leading me to think that the ideas behind its purpose weren't very well developed. Her works seemed very arbitrary; like she just did it because she thought “this is so broad a lot of people could extrapolate meanings from this,” without having her own clear vantage point.
At one point in the question section, a person in the audience asked something along the lines of: "Um... so are we supposed to read more in depth into your works? Find a deeper meaning?” Then he went onto describe his own ideas of the meanings of her work, which she had basically just finished suggesting.
UM. Why are you here in a very specific presentation about art if you don't know that art can be interpreted.... it was just like "um, am i allowed to have an interpretation of your artwork? is there actually a deeper level to your artwork than someone trying to walk around with a strange hat?"
I don't know, maybe I'm being mean - it was just kind of an annoying question. Good god man; think about it! Is it actually possible that her work could have more than one level of meaning? In fact, she just pointed that out!
Anyway, we ended up leaving halfway through since Jason came with me and could only take so much; unfortunately he doesn't share my love of art fully; though he did have some interesting things to say about the works she showed; and I did get a few tidbits in the presentation about the issue of public artworks intervening in public space, which is something I'm writing an essay about write now. I have four papers on the go due at the end of the month, which is one of the reasons I'm so stressed. But they're actually really interesting - for those who might care, I’m going to give you a little window into what’s going on:
ARTH 2003: Canadian 20th Century and Contemporary Art: The essay guideline is simply to create your own exhibition proposal using a floor plan of an imagined gallery and the works of one or several artists from that time period. It’s very exciting; I’ve already come up with a rough theme (which I still find hard to put into words, something along the lines of “spaces of the mind (crap title),” or “thresholds,” but much better once I finish) and have chosen works from
I'm going to be weaving together an exhibit with the sculpture works of Roland Poulin, a work called Wound in the Lung by Lani Maestro, and some works by Shirley Wiitasako. What's good about it is that it represents three works of different mediums - sculpture, paint, and installation; as well as being thematically linked.
Here's some examples - the whole thing was really inspired by Roland Poulin's whose sculpture I absolutely adore. These pictures really don't do it justice; and it would help if I explained it to you in words; but it's so hard that I'm just going to give you a glimpse:
The Last Garden, 1999
polychromed wood
Slow Shift, 1990
polychromed wood
Already, the Night Is upon Us, No. 1, 1991
polychromed wood
Thresholds, 1993
polychromed wood
Maybe I could try to describe what I love; I'm going to be much more eloquent when I write the catalogue essay. Basically, his works (though you can't see it as much in these works, the most would be in the half-submerged table-looking form), have the overwhelming feeling that they're almost submerged, below water, the invisible water that's present in the ground of the gallery. It is simultaneously sinking and floating; has elements of the macabre... it also tilts on the threshold of representational and non-representational, giving us hints of signs in things like suggestions of the shapes of coffins, tombstones or poles in water like you would see at a dock; the edges of stairs... so we are always at the edge of recognizing and not - familiarity and the strange. His works put us in a strange place... and the different pieces have a kind of communication with each other, leaning inwards. I can almost see these natural elements, like wind and water, interacting invisibly with the works. They are present, but also far away.
ARTH 3106: Art History and Methodology: We basically have to create our own Art History course! We have to outline the way it will be taught, why it will be taught that way, a course outline with various topics, etc. It can be on anything we find interesting. It’s a lot of work, but will be very valuable for me, wanting to be a professor. I’m going to be doing a class of Aesthetics (basically Philosophy of Art), which focuses on Art in terms of contemporary interpretations and issues in the art world.
Eg: Themes like: Reproduction, Presence, and the Original; Forgery, Appropriation and Authorship; Beauty and the Anti-Aesthetic; Against a Definition of Art (neo-Wittgensteinian ideas); Intentionalism versus Textual Independence; Public art, controversy and collaboration; Performance, Experience and Participation; Multiculturalism, community and perspective; etc!
ARTH 3001: Issues in Contemporary Art: This topic is far reaching; something pertinent to the course materials but basically about Contemporary Canadian Art - right now I’m thinking about discussing Public Art and its place in Canadian society with those who are antagonistic about the Art world; issues of intervention and cultural identity. I’m interested in exploring that relationship that people have to art when they don’t like it and are upset about having to pay tax dollars towards it; also they are forced to see it in cases of public art.
ARTH 2007: Asian Art: This topic is just about how artists apply a given art theory practically into their artwork. There were a few different topics; I chose the contemporary Japanese Gutai artwork; and how for two different artworks the artist used the Gutai Manifesto as inspiration for their work.
So there you go - it’s a lot of work; doubly so since they’re topics I really care about, and could possibly get me accepted by York University (we have to submit a paper less than 15 pages). For York, I want to use a paper about contemporary art, since that is my main interest, so I’m thinking 3001; though for some strange reason my research led me into that area which is not necessarily my focus. We’ll see how it turns out, it may not be appropriate for what I want to present to York.
"Panel Presentation: Performance Art NOW, Kinga Araya (Montreal) and Paul Couillard, Fado Performance Inc. (Toronto):
A two-hour presentation focusing on current states of contemporary performance art practice, scheduled to coincide with the University of Ottawa students’ performance series (March 6-10)."
I thought it would tell me a bit more about performance art NOW, which I was interested to hear about; but for what I could tell it focused more on the artists' body of work. Unfortunately Kinga Araya's work didn't really interest me too much; and she was also not quite eloquent about what it really meant, leading me to think that the ideas behind its purpose weren't very well developed. Her works seemed very arbitrary; like she just did it because she thought “this is so broad a lot of people could extrapolate meanings from this,” without having her own clear vantage point.
At one point in the question section, a person in the audience asked something along the lines of: "Um... so are we supposed to read more in depth into your works? Find a deeper meaning?” Then he went onto describe his own ideas of the meanings of her work, which she had basically just finished suggesting.
UM. Why are you here in a very specific presentation about art if you don't know that art can be interpreted.... it was just like "um, am i allowed to have an interpretation of your artwork? is there actually a deeper level to your artwork than someone trying to walk around with a strange hat?"
I don't know, maybe I'm being mean - it was just kind of an annoying question. Good god man; think about it! Is it actually possible that her work could have more than one level of meaning? In fact, she just pointed that out!
Anyway, we ended up leaving halfway through since Jason came with me and could only take so much; unfortunately he doesn't share my love of art fully; though he did have some interesting things to say about the works she showed; and I did get a few tidbits in the presentation about the issue of public artworks intervening in public space, which is something I'm writing an essay about write now. I have four papers on the go due at the end of the month, which is one of the reasons I'm so stressed. But they're actually really interesting - for those who might care, I’m going to give you a little window into what’s going on:
ARTH 2003: Canadian 20th Century and Contemporary Art: The essay guideline is simply to create your own exhibition proposal using a floor plan of an imagined gallery and the works of one or several artists from that time period. It’s very exciting; I’ve already come up with a rough theme (which I still find hard to put into words, something along the lines of “spaces of the mind (crap title),” or “thresholds,” but much better once I finish) and have chosen works from
I'm going to be weaving together an exhibit with the sculpture works of Roland Poulin, a work called Wound in the Lung by Lani Maestro, and some works by Shirley Wiitasako. What's good about it is that it represents three works of different mediums - sculpture, paint, and installation; as well as being thematically linked.
Here's some examples - the whole thing was really inspired by Roland Poulin's whose sculpture I absolutely adore. These pictures really don't do it justice; and it would help if I explained it to you in words; but it's so hard that I'm just going to give you a glimpse:
The Last Garden, 1999
polychromed wood
Slow Shift, 1990
polychromed wood
Already, the Night Is upon Us, No. 1, 1991
polychromed wood
Thresholds, 1993
polychromed wood
Maybe I could try to describe what I love; I'm going to be much more eloquent when I write the catalogue essay. Basically, his works (though you can't see it as much in these works, the most would be in the half-submerged table-looking form), have the overwhelming feeling that they're almost submerged, below water, the invisible water that's present in the ground of the gallery. It is simultaneously sinking and floating; has elements of the macabre... it also tilts on the threshold of representational and non-representational, giving us hints of signs in things like suggestions of the shapes of coffins, tombstones or poles in water like you would see at a dock; the edges of stairs... so we are always at the edge of recognizing and not - familiarity and the strange. His works put us in a strange place... and the different pieces have a kind of communication with each other, leaning inwards. I can almost see these natural elements, like wind and water, interacting invisibly with the works. They are present, but also far away.
ARTH 3106: Art History and Methodology: We basically have to create our own Art History course! We have to outline the way it will be taught, why it will be taught that way, a course outline with various topics, etc. It can be on anything we find interesting. It’s a lot of work, but will be very valuable for me, wanting to be a professor. I’m going to be doing a class of Aesthetics (basically Philosophy of Art), which focuses on Art in terms of contemporary interpretations and issues in the art world.
Eg: Themes like: Reproduction, Presence, and the Original; Forgery, Appropriation and Authorship; Beauty and the Anti-Aesthetic; Against a Definition of Art (neo-Wittgensteinian ideas); Intentionalism versus Textual Independence; Public art, controversy and collaboration; Performance, Experience and Participation; Multiculturalism, community and perspective; etc!
ARTH 3001: Issues in Contemporary Art: This topic is far reaching; something pertinent to the course materials but basically about Contemporary Canadian Art - right now I’m thinking about discussing Public Art and its place in Canadian society with those who are antagonistic about the Art world; issues of intervention and cultural identity. I’m interested in exploring that relationship that people have to art when they don’t like it and are upset about having to pay tax dollars towards it; also they are forced to see it in cases of public art.
ARTH 2007: Asian Art: This topic is just about how artists apply a given art theory practically into their artwork. There were a few different topics; I chose the contemporary Japanese Gutai artwork; and how for two different artworks the artist used the Gutai Manifesto as inspiration for their work.
So there you go - it’s a lot of work; doubly so since they’re topics I really care about, and could possibly get me accepted by York University (we have to submit a paper less than 15 pages). For York, I want to use a paper about contemporary art, since that is my main interest, so I’m thinking 3001; though for some strange reason my research led me into that area which is not necessarily my focus. We’ll see how it turns out, it may not be appropriate for what I want to present to York.