Second Group Crit / Ideas

For my thesis I have developed a concept, for now its reserved for "something here", it could be conversation, making new friends, trying to quit smoking, and many more. I want to think strongly about my type decisions for I think the language is very important for the translation of the project ideals to the viewer. I want to place sight specific markings that encourage interaction. These places could be places that are normally not viewed as a place where people congregate. Examples of these could be public ashtrays, water fountains, inside and outside elevators. I recently thought of a saying for the buses, "Reserved for close contact with strangers." My other project is specific to the gallery space, I want to create a variation of the hello my name is sticker, with specific tag lines. The initial tag line will be I love or I heart symbol something. There is going to be something for each artist in the show. The stickers will be used to encourage conversation about the work. The love aspect is relative, because the things people love are the things they care the most about and the things that know and like to talk the most about. I want to encourage conversation between people who like specific peoples work. Below I have included some rough sketches.

First Group Critique

For my thesis project I aim to explore the lack of interaction amongst humans. A lot of people waste their time avoiding contact with others, when they could instead learn something from one another. This occurrence has been observed in many public areas especially on certain public transportation systems. I want to encourage others to change how they view these types of situations. I aim to do this through physical alterations to spaces. At first, these spaces will seem unaltered, but upon taking a second look the viewer will notice a difference and that is the important part. The idea is to show people a different perspective of this situation by making them view something in a way the have not thought to view it before. These alterations to spaces may or may not include written text.

In the critique Victor brought my attention to Tino Sehgal, a artist who deals with a similar concept. He chooses to create situations that are art artworks, as opposed to material objects. I thought this was an interesting perspective. He makes the viewer physically interact with the work as opposed to merely viewing the work. I thought it would be fun to take this into the gallery. I would like to create a event for the space on that day, and have people participate.

This idea of creating situations has been repeatedly done by improv everywhere. They go out and create these scenes that are so out of place that the people not participating begin to interact. I want to create this concept visually on public transportation.

The Studio Chapter 6

I thought the most interesting thing about this chapter was showcasing how Murakami has turned his practice into a business like Warhol, and he still creates high demand for his art even though everyone knows his hands did not create the work. Murakami gives credit to the artists on the back on the canvases. I view Murakami as a fine art Art director. I find it ironic that he says how he has difficulty communicating with the workers, but does not attempt to do the work himself.

I used to think that my staff were motivated by money, but the most important thing for creative people is the sense that they are learning. It's like video game. They have frustration with my high expectations, so when they get my 'yes' for their work, they like they have won a level."

I feel the same as Murakami's staff, the money is good but their is a staisfaction that comes from working so hard on something and then knowing you did it right. My boss two was a perfectionist and I used to complain when he was picky, but it has instilled in me a keen eye for detail that I am proud of.

Being good in business is the most fascinating kind of art... Making money is art and working is art and good business is the best art.

There is no artist that does not strive to make money. They can not survive without selling their work. If your selling your art its a reflection of your popularity which means you must be doing something right. Just because your succesful in your business doesn't mean you can not be a good artist to. Art is 90 percent business and 10 percent creativity.

I threw out my general life , so that I can make a concentration for my job.

Murakami shows the detication that it takes to be as succesful as he has become.

A studio is not just a place where artists make art but a platform for negotiation and a stage for performance.

In this chapter the discussed how you can learn so much from someones studio, its not just the art that is created their, but how it is created. Who creates it. Where it is created. All of these things reflect the artists. The studio reflects the artists, more then his work. The work is the final product, how the artist gets there is very telling of their character.

Never ever presell the work.

This is very important. I knew this before I read this but I wanted to note it. Me being a designer it is very important that you do not "presell" your work. What I mean is not to presell your work because design work is different but do not show unfinished worked to a client. It is similar to the quote in that if you say how much it will cost before its done you will not know if its the right price. If you show the work before its done you run the risk of the client liking it before its finished. So in both scenarios your screwed because you got impatient. Be patient.

MFA Thesis Show

Overall I thought the show was ok content wise. I really enjoyed the portrait photographs to the right as you entered the gallery. I admired the quality of the photograph, the lighting, the way it was shot all that good stuff. The portraits were shot against a black background which creates a simple straightforward presentation. In my thesis research I have found that this is common thread with which I gravitate towards. Many of the photographs I shot contain a similar aesthetic. I did not relate to the content in the same way. I was not attracted to much else in the show, that does not mean the other works in the show were not good, but neither the content nor the physical qualities of the work generated interest.



The space I thought could have been better, I think this shows how important it is to setup the gallery space in a specific way. There is a rhythm or melody which goes along with the show. The impact each piece has on each other can be both good or bad. With this in mind I did not like the first room to the right. It contained very large and when I say large I mean freaking huge paintings on every wall. What bothered me was not the paintings themselves but the relationship of the paintings to the size of the wall and the size of the room. I can understand how the artist may have wanted to create a overwhelming sense in the room but I just seemed like to much. There was no room to breath you could not even get back far enough to really absorb the paintings. I felt like I was sitting at the front row of the movie theater and there were screens all around me. These problem could have been a result of having assigned walls.



The floating walls in the middle I thought were a bit cumbersome. I thought the idea of the walls was a thoughtful in that it broke up the space and allowed for more work to be shown. I think the idea struggles in the placement of the walls. They are right in the middle and quite large. Maybe it should be one wall or that the wall is place perpendicular to a grounded wall. I am not really sure what the answer is.

5 Grad Programs

Programs I have interest in.

1. Yale University
2. School of Visual Arts, New York
3. Parsons New School of Design
4. University of the Arts
5. University of Penn

Gallery Visits

I decided that me being a graphic designer that a design exhibition would be interesting to me, but in this case I was wrong. I saw the post on the Thesis Blog for the Zach Feuer Gallery, showcasing an exhibition by the Pop artist, teacher, and nun Sister Mary Corita and decided to go there for class.

Overall I felt the exhibit was very similar to that of the Black Panther exhibit at the New Museum. This could be a result of the time period, but overall it felt very documentary. I think that is a problem with presenting design in a gallery, because design is primarily viewed in a print format. Where as paintings are presented on canvas, and then when they are documented they are placed inside books or catalogs. So when trying to view artwork in a print format, I think I view it as documentary. The lack of current design, and the lack of interest in her style, may have also strongly fueled my negative interest in the work.

Another problem I find with design work is the amount of design work usually found in a exhibit. I found this problem in both the New Museum and Zach Feuer Exhibit. I think anyone who views the work just gets bored. In this case it was the same style over and over again, and shown twenty or more times. In comparison consider a painting gallery there may only be a 5-6 paintings all of which usually contain a similar style, but the content will differ. Therefore in my experiences I just find none design exhibits more exciting. This being I have yet to go to the AIGA Museum. It on my todo list....

I attended to other exhibits that I found to be much more influential and entertaining. One gallery was for the photographer Edward Burtynsky and the other a Painter/Illustrator named Olaf Bruening.

Edward Burtynsky showcased multiple large scale photographs. My initial attraction was to the size and detail off the photographs. Each photograph showed images in great detail and the images he choose to represent contained incredibly vast spaces. The images which were represented ranged from vast parking lots of cars, oil fields and highways that appeared to go on forever. The size of the spaces in which he captures reminded me of Andreas Gursky's spaces although his are digitally altered where as Burtynsky's are not. In contrast to the detailed city based photographs he also showcased abstract arial photographs of quereies and natural landscapes. These images contained the same large scale, high detail, vast spaces which he includes in his other photographs, but gave a much more abstract and distant feel.

After looking at his photographs I read his press release, then went and looked at the photographs again. I found the format and content which he presented was very appropriate for his concepts. Burtynsky attempts to capture the vast spaces which consume oil, the vast spaces which capture oil, and the vast spaces created by searching for oil. His infatuation with oil shows through in his photographs and I believe his format is very telling of his message.




The last exhibit showcased the artist Olaf Breuning, and consisted of wooden sculptures, and hand painted drawings on the wall with black paint.

His drawings and sculptures "speak about the simple questions one could have about life." He creates the initial drawings in self-imposed isolation prior to the exhibition. By translating his simple drawings into large scale they become very approachable and humorous.

Upon entering the gallery I was immediately drawn to his illustrations because I strongly enjoy illustration. I thought it was nice to see illustration used in the gallery for a change. He incorporated sculptures along with illustration into the gallery space. The images were very humorous and relative. They spoke strongly and confidently about the problem's which humans face. The comical aspects of his work when combined with the simple illustrations and sculptures make his work translate very well. I really enjoyed the image of a set of hills, with a car full of people at the top and the bottom of each hill. The people at the top were smiling while the people at the bottom were not. It was so simple, but so easy to understand. He was just saying how there are ups and downs in life and that you need to be positive when times are not so good and when your own top don't get arrogant. I enjoyed this a lot. I relate to it a lot.

The Fair CHAPTER 3

"with young artists, you find the greatest purity. When you buy from the first or second show, you're inside the confidence-building, the identity-building of an artist. Its not just about buying a piece. It's about buying into someone's life and where they are going with it."

I enjoyed this comment because it showed that a work of art is more then just a product you can buy at a store. I think this is especially true of new artists, they haven't been corrupted by commercial influences. I feel that when artists first emerge they are somewhat naive to what goes on thus they are making art for the sake of making art.

"There are no prices or red dots on the wall. Such an overt gesture at commerce is considered tacky. Moreover, a prospective buyer's query about cost is, according to Scott Wright, "an opportunity for engagement."

The fair differs greatly from the auction. There are many more factors that contribute to selling a painting at the fair then at the auction. The dealers are able to manipulate the buyer, and choose who they think the painting is best suited for. They also can spur competition between buyers like in the auction. In short the purchasing of paintings is much more intimate then the auction. You don't just put a price on a painting, then have someone say ok ill buy that one here is the money.

"The art world has no rules," he explains. "so i attribute the longevity of the gallery to the fact that i wrote my own."

"the art fair is no place for an artist." One of Baldessari's oft-repeated jokes is that an artist entering an art fair is like a teenager barging into his parents' bedroom while they're having sex.

I thought Baldessari's comment was funny. It is quite apparent from the reading the fair is not a place for an artist. Although it does show how an artist's carreer is very relant upon business, and that it is not all about making art in your studio. There are many other outside factors that go into being a succesful artist.

"you can't use money as an index of quality. That is a fallacy. That will drive you crazy!"

If you are making art purely as means to make money then you are not a real artist.

"If they are any good, they make art because they have to," he says. "they don't do it to please the market."

This relates to my previous quote in that her it shows that at some point an artist may be forced to make art to maintain his practice, but that is the sole purpose. They do not make commercially driven art to please the market.