JOHN ARMLEDER

 
    I found the interview with John Armleder so intriguing. I think it was how earnest Armleder was that drew me in. At first, I disagreed with Armleder when he said, "Most important, I've never believed that what I think about my own work has anything to do with the work itself." I believed the opposite. However, he seems very honest in this statement. I think he says it because he himself does not know what to think about his artwork as he states. It seems to him that the interpretations of the viewer of his art is what is important. Whatever they think becomes what the art means. In other words, the interpretation of the public becomes what the art is. I think this is true. This quote also explains Armleder's relationship with his viewers. He is dependent on them. They give meaning to his art. If not for them, the art would be stagnant. They recreate the art and bring their own references to it. His position on the importance of the viewer explains why he enjoys being considered to be part of may disparate movements. By being included in so many movements his art is timeless. It keeps being applied to contemporary movements. Considering all of these movements mean different thing, they change the art to fit into a movement's logic. I like the idea of this because it gives the art power to be indestructible. Also I just find it amazing that his art is so versatile. Not many artist make art that satisfies as many movements as Armleder's does.It is funny to me. He does this without even trying. He talks about having pseudointelligent ideas. Or ideas that try to be smart but fall short. I was kind of confused by this but I also rather enjoyed it. He is saying that sometimes stupid or simple ideas work. It seems contradictory to what I have been learning in school because Im told to have concepts concepts concepts. Sometimes my deepest concept art falls short. I find his dot room art interesting and I would like to make this kind of art. Stealing other artist's work and putting it in my own show. It is like Armleder says,"Things look alike. If they don’t, step back, and they will. Step back again—they won’t just look alike, they’ll actually be alike." I like how putting work together helps a viewer to look at things differently.I makes me think that I want to make art that both explains and confuses people because I believe the process of the people looking, bringing in their own references, or being uninterested in a piece of art is the interesting part.I think Armleder accomplishes this, not only with his art but also by the way he speaks. I am very confused but he has given me a lot of things to think about. I believe that Armleder would accept what I think about his art. He is very open to interpretations and ideas. He does not want to make conceptual art that only "insiders" can understand. He makes his art almost neutral so that whether an art scholar or tourist come to his show, what each person thinks is valid. It is as if he makes the art for a person to drive meaning. Meaning that is personal to then and not him, the artist. It is generous. I do not know if i could be this generous in making art because I would make things that were personal to me. 

Aunrico Gatson

In the beginning, I was very confused by the art that Aunrico Gatson showed us. He did not give the introduction of himself that one would expect in a lecture. He simply just got into showing us a ton of his work. I know he was very nervous and that may have affected how much he spoke and what he said. Nevertheless, I thought it was an interesting approach to giving a lecture. In fact, I think it was very brave. I feel often, in class and in the 'real' world, that artists feel the need to explain themselves for creating what they have made. Aunrico approached the lecture so that the art spoke for itself. It was intriguing because it was as if I were in the gallery viewing his art by myself, yet the artist was in the room. However, the entire lecture did not go on this way. Towards the end I felt i was picking up little clues to what his art was about from what he was saying and the questions he was being asked.
     Of the many works of art that Aunrico showed, his video art drew me in the most. I had an unconscionable preconceived notion that video artists were hyper conceptual and pompous bastards making fun of me through video. After seeing Aunrico's videos, I now know i was sadly mistaken. His video art is simply beautiful just as his paintings and sculptures are. They have a tension because they show footage that normally would be scary but are arranged in a way that is more seductive and alluring. I like when he said he used the kaleidoscopic pattern to explore space that is not there.
     Although the video art made sense to me, his paintings did not. His reason for making them was unclear. He kept saying ""I am not a painter," but nothing about his paintings alluded to that. They were pristine and simple yet beautiful and eye-catching. Again this screams bravery to me. He seems like the kind of artist that just wants things to look good on the wall. His(Aunrico's) art obviously has personal meaning but he does not think his autobiography is important in viewing the art. He wants the pieces to be appreciated for their beauty. This is admirable and he pulls this off because his art is so clean that I might question if a human even made it.
    I learned a lot from Aunrico and there is one last thing I found noteworthy. He had so much art work and it seems that all of his art that he makes is to be shown. Each piece is so perfect because he has the intention of showing it from the beginning. I can learn from that because in foundations I think I do certain projects just to get them done instead of having a greater purpose.    
                                   

PMA Trip #2

Returning to the PMA was a relaxing experience. It was towards the end of the day so there were not many people there. I was a super nice day the day I went so the room seemed much brighter than the last time. I noticed the air of the room My painting hung in to. It seemed kind of old and musty which contradicted the brightness. Since the gallery monitors were nearing the end of their shifts, they were very loud. Two women near me were especially loud and talking about what they were going to wear to an upcoming wedding. Yet, it did not bother me because when I started drawing they became just background noise. I couldn't sit down when I drew because the room where Portrait of Artist Father acts as a hallway to the next room and there were a few people walking through. Again, I do not think many people would really stop and look at this painting (the painting is in a room with 9 others and they are all of nudes.) This time though when people noticed I was drawing this particular one, they would stand behind me and take a second look. Since this is my second look, I am noticing the awkwardness of the form Duchamp painting. The man's right arm is supposed to be resting on the chair and holding up the man's head but instead he looks like he is doing a super model pose. His elbow sticks way too far out to be resting on the arm of the chair. Even if his body makes me wonder, I still enjoy the earthy color palette. I love the yellow color that floats behind the man and his chair. Looking more closely at the background, i am starting to notice a bunch of layers underneath the top layer of paint. In the top right corner of the painting There are black lines outlining some kind of form that i can not recognize. There are also some on the left side but they are hindden better with his smushes of paint. All in all the painting still reminds me of a grandfather and I enjoyed doing this study.