Local Exhibitions

Over the next few weeks I plan to make a trip to one of many local art exhibitions and create a review. Finding local exhibitions is a lot easier than you may think, there are several in Ulster County alone. However, I don't plan to stay that local. The first exhibition I have in mind is just outside Ulster County, in Poughkeepsie. It's located in the Barret Art Center and it's going to be called A Celebration of Color; here's a link containing some information about it:
 A Celebration of Color

Visiting this exhibition with my budget and lack of a car should be no problem. There is a bus that travels solely between New Paltz and Poughkeepsie a few times a day. The trip is under ten dollars and the bus station in Poughkeepsie is a short walk away from the Barret. This is likely the trip I'll  make if my next option doesn't pan out.

That option is a chance I have to take a free trip to the MoMA in New York City. A friend of mine is a photography major, and stays very involved in the school's art department. Through him, I found out the school has already reserved a couple buses to bring whoever wants to go to the MoMA. I believe some seats are saved for art majors, but there should be enough left open for me to join in.

There are always a lot of exhibitions at the MoMA, the one I plan to critique is called Inventing Abstract. This exhibit explores the origins of abstract art, and displays select pieces from 1910-1925 which are believed to have started the abstract movement. Most of the art in this exhibition is also from Europe. I really hope this trip works out because abstract art contains most of my favorite pieces.

My final option would be to plan my own trip to the city and visit the Metropolitan  Museum of Art and review one of the exhibitions they have there. A trip to the city really doesn't take much planning. On any given day, all I have to do is go down to the Trailways bus station and buy a round trip ticket to the city. This option is a bit more costly than going to Poughkeepsie, but it is much more worth it. In the MET I'd like to see an exhibition exploiting the art of Africa. This exhibit is supposed to contain artifacts as well as modern artwork and is meant to convey the dynamism of African artwork after 1910. Similar to the MoMA exhibit, the African Art showing will highlight pieces from 1910 up until the 1930's.

I plan for this trip to happen sooner rather than later, but knowing myself it may take a bit of time before I'm able to make this trek. However, I am more excited for this trip than I would be for ordinary school work; I've never been to any famous art exhibitions, and can't wait for my first time. When it's all said and done I'm sure I'll have a greater appreciation for artist and visual culture than ever before.

Appropriation In Art

There is a certain technique that is becoming increasingly popular in modern art. It is known as appropriation, which basically means to borrow the art work of others and use it to create your own. This remix video using appropriation from Winnie the Pooh and Apocalypse Now perfectly exemplifies this art form.

Sometimes, the agency a producer will use is to make a political statement but it could also just be for humor or the sake of homage to different artist. In this case I think a small bit of politics is involved but more so humor.
In my opinion humor mattered most: just in the sense that such a horrifically mature movie is being combined with one of the most innocent, good-willing T.V. shows. The way Todd Grahm (the producer) succeeds in his agency of humor is the extremely coincidental yet near perfect synchronicity of the movie's audio and the shows visual scene. Each cartoon character is matched up with a voice and together there is perfect context. Just look at the tightly wound rabbit who has the voice of a high strung machinist in the movie. Of course, a lot of the alussions would be lost on someone who isn't familiar with either of the two original medias, but there is can be more then just humor.
Another possible agency of Todd was a political one. In teaming up a show for children around the age of four with a graphic war there is a statement along the lines of the impossibility of being able to hide such horrific events from our children. I don't see this as Todd trying to desensitize and youth, only to infer the idea of a contradictory society, where children are being shielded from the horrors of the world. Maybe that's an appropriate thing to do, but seeing a show for toddlers with the audio of a rated R movie can be very thought provoking.

Studium and Punctum Breakdown

The terms studium and punctum were coined by Roland Barthes. The idea of analyzing a picture through these two means, to me, seems very similar to using denotation and connotation. Studium equals "meanings that are nameable", while punctum is supposed to "sting" the viewer. In other words, the punctum is what the picture means to those looking at it.

What's interesting is where these two means of analysis could lead. After observing a picture subjectively, each person will usually be influenced to form a specific "truth" behind the image. Truth is in quotations in order to represent that it may not be the truth at all, but only what the photographer hopes for us to believe.



In this picture the studium is simple, as it usually is. There is a bald man raising an assault riffle with one hand. He has sunglasses and a beard appearing to be around 40 years of age. On his gun there are orange letters, visibly reading "WE SHALL OVER-" Behind him is a crowd of people all holding up flags. In the skyline of the picture, right alongside the assault rifle there is a tall, thin white structure which is very recognizable the Washington  Monument. The man has a very firm expression on his face.

The punctum perfectly overlaps the truth one would form after seeing this picture. However, understanding the punctum will explain why that truth is formed. I think this picture reminds most of its viewers of the same thing, the second amendment. This is clearly a man who thinks he deserves to have a gun. What makes this picture so convincing is the simplicity of the argument it inceptively forms. There is a man proudly waving a gun in front of a monument representing one of the most applauded characters in american history and his noteworthy accomplishments which turned this country into one were all people have the right to own a gun. Well, that amongst many other, if not more important than equally as necessary, freedoms. The words on the gun allude to the same argument. In the context, it's extremely likely that the whole quote reads "We shall overcome", referring to the African-American civil rights movement. The point is, those politicians who are trying enforce stricter gun control laws are oppressing liberties all men are entitled to. Oh, and the large protest in the back is pretty effective at provoking thoughts of revolution as well.

To me, a truly effective punctum should allow the truth taken away from an image to be accessible and straight to the point. This picture does that well. Whether your for gun control or against it, the picture absolutely says "Owning a weapon is our right as Americans". Of course, the opposing viewpoint is no where to be seen in this picture, but that may very well be the point. This picture was taken from the New York times, known to be very liberal in their opinions.