Church part 2

The most interesting thing about the downtown church was how it seemed to be simultaneously in three different time periods. It is done in an Egyptian style which gives it a 1000s year old feel, but at the time it looks like a church built in the mid-1800s. The floor layout, sanctuary design and relation to the street all speak of the 19th century churches we are familiar with. On top of these two periods, the church is also situated in the present day. The decoration of the church was fascinating because we are so used to churches influenced by ancient Rome. The colors seemed unusual to me, especially as they were presented in the stained glass windows. 

past and recent past.

When we were in class Friday I saw the picture of the sphinx on the board and was instantly reminded of a sculpture I have seen at Cheekwood. The statue at Cheekwood stuck out to me while I was there just because of how bizarre I thought it was. I wondered why something so creepy looking would be in such an otherwise serene garden.

Our book says the Sphinx was made to show the intellect of man saddled with the strength of an animal. I think the book tends to exaggerate the meanings of pieces (like when it talked about the male and female earlier in the semester). As prof. Walden said, the Egyptians commonly used a combination of animal and human. Cheekwood was built at about the same time of the discovery of Egyptian tombs. I don’t know the history of the sculpture at Cheekwood, but using context clues I would assume it is a result of the Egyption craze that swept the world. Do any of y’all know any more information about it? 

Decisions: homes on the bottom because of grounding; horizons on top for collage to have openness; water at top because of positive associations and higher value; self photo in middle-I am the center of my own universe;

Color: I chose a lot of green because that’s not normally associated with the United States, but it is an association I wanted to make.

Light: I arranged the pictures to be closer together at the bottom of the collage versus the top; this allowed the white from the poster board to show through

Texture: I chose to do a smooth texture using only photos.

Volume: heavier/weightier on the right side because it’s representative of my future.

Line: horizons; vertical axis represents dividing line of pursuing my own interests and branching off from my familial history; implied lines between horizon pictures;

Space: homes on bottom because of grounding; skies on top because of openness and continuing space; water at top because more value/ feelings of soul; time frame left to right: small town MS, soul mate leaving, go to Nashville (formal city), follow your bliss to a new place, interconnectivity of the world, use of passages and possibilities.

Scale: God is bigger than the boogie man—he’s bigger than Godzilla and the monsters on TV; Transition area is largest scale because it’s most important;

Symbolism: water represents my soul; houses anchor the collage and represent stages of my life and future;

I wanted to represent myself through a trip I took this year to the Pacific Northwest. While I was there I felt a connection to the land and the people that I have never felt anywhere else. From left to right there is a progression in time. The middle column, which is a different color that the other pictures, represents my transition from living with my family in Mississippi to living on my own in Nashville. The picture in the middle says “Follow Your Bliss.” To ground the collage and give it weight I put all the houses on the bottom. The house on the far left is representative of living with my family, it is the cornerstone of my collage. Then the houses progress in time to the right through college with the last one being my future. The house in my future is split because I hope to be living with someone.  The next row up is an important relationship of mine. It is the person I consider to be my soul mate. Before transitioning to living for myself I saw her walking down a path alone. Afterwards I saw her turning around and telling me to join. The last picture is a bench looking out into the future. On the third row is the built environment, which represents place to me. The first picture is representative of small town life in Mississippi while the picture on the other side of the transition is Nashville. Normally when I think of the U.S. I think of Wal-Mart’s and Interstates, but for the purposes of my collage, I want to think of Olympic National Park and the natural beauty of the Pacific Northwest

The last picture is boats and international ferries, which to me show the interconnectivity of the world in this day and age. As you move up the college the ideas become more abstract so the pictures are spaces further apart. I believe my soul has a unique connection to water, so all of the top pictures contain water.

Blag 2

Although this is obviously a painting of the Parthenon, there is a deeper meaning in the style, placement, and composition of the painting that sheds light on the artist and time period in which it was painted.

The small person in the foreground plays up the size and dominance of the building and, by extension, the history of Greek thought and classical ideals. The emphasis placed on making the Parthenon a glowing dominant icon in the painting is an indicator of the prevailing thought when this was painted. To the artist the Parthenon represented ideals that transcended place and time.

Blag 3

The Distinction between Art and Craft

Sally J. Markowitz

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3333159

In her article Markowitz attempts to make a explain the “why” between what we call “art” and what we call “craft.” Throughout the article she explores different points of views relating to the distinction. One I liked but didn’t nessisarily agree with is a quote by Arthur Danto. Danto said art theory “detaches objects from the real world and makes them part of a different world, and art world, a world of interpreted things” (60). I believe most craft is art, but not all art is craft. Too me even the white board in the front of class could be considered art, it was designed by someone in a certain place and time. We do not see it as art, just as the cave paintings weren’t considered art 30,000 years ago. I think we can be blinded by the functionality of an art object and dismiss it as a mere craft as well. If a potter makes a thought provoking sculpture that happens to also be a vase for flowers how can that be considered less “art” than a painting made for class. The author goes on to say “perhaps the simplest interpretation of the charge of elitism rests on the claim that there is no real difference between art and craft objects, but only a difference in social status between artist and craftspeople” (66). I completely agree with that and am interested to know what y’all think.