Friday, June 5, 2015

Event 2 | Singular Spaces: From the Eccentric to the Extraordinary in Spanish Art Environments | @ Fowler Museum

For my third event, I came back to Fowler Museum to see Jo Farb Hernández's photography exhibition, Singular Spaces: From the Eccentric to the Extraordinary in Spanish Art Environments, documenting the organic yet complex artworks produced by eight Spanish artists. The main reason I visited this exhibit is because of how it connects to my final project which involves launching a spaceship with millions of people to outer-space forever. One connection that my final project has with these artists is the theme of “isolation”: after centuries, the spaceship will be inhabited by humans who have never set foot on Earth, and will probably have a totally different culture and mindset. This is similar to the way that these eight artists all have limited or no connection to art culture; their inspiration comes not from textbooks or teachers, but from experience and raw emotion.

Figure 1 - Me at Fowler Museum

For example, artist Julio Basanta López decorated his home with colorful larger-than-life-size demon figures built from bricks and concrete, but he did not do this for aesthetic values; Julio suffered psychological trauma from the death of his son and uses these demon figures to identify and possibly exorcise them. Another artist, José María Garrido, who worked as a fisherman took up art after the death of his close friend, creating a museum filled with objects from the sea.

Figure 2 - Grouping of demons above entrance gate, 2009
Julio Basanta López

Another aspect that I would be curious to see in the community of space-born humans is their resourcefulness. As a whole they will have more limited resources, but to what extent will they make use of what they have? Francisco del Río Cuenca proved that even an illiterate field-worker can take advantage of a poor situation; when a cargo of clams was accidentally unloaded in his village, Francisco brought back bags of these clams to decorate his house that he was constructing, now recognized as a tourist attraction.

Figure 3 - Contruction, planters, and tree sheathed in shells on the third patio, 2009
Francisco del Río Cuenca 

Peter Buch’s work with sculpting with rocks and earth gives off a very primal feel especially since it was created only years ago. While it may not look awe-inspiring, it is the backstory and the artist himself that invokes the feeling of amazement and wonder from the viewer. Similarly, Josep Pujiula i Vila created structures from sticks and stones; what seems interesting to me is the time and effort and background of the artist rather than his actual artwork. Obviously something like this can be copied with enough manpower, and is not unique in itself, but it is Josep himself who makes it special. I point this out because I believe we will have a similar view on art from space-born humans as we do for these pieces of art. I believe that we will be amazed and awed by the artworks created by space-born humans even more so because they were created by humans of such a different background.

Figure 4 - Monumental building in the shape of a head, 2011
Peter Buch

Figure 5 - Head with a Dream, 2008
Peter Buch

Figure 6 - Southern view of labyrinth, 2002
Josep Pujiula i Vila


I feel that comparing these more primal artworks with contemporary artworks may be what we see with space-born art and Earth art. Being in such a different atmosphere will definitely bring an interesting outlook on life and art, similar to how these eight artists have been cut off from more modern technologies and cultures. The differences in styles of art in Singular Spaces compared to more popular art may show us how different space-born human art and Earth human art will come to be a few hundred years later. 

Sunday, May 31, 2015

Event 2 | Making Strange: Gagawaka + Postmortem by Vivan Sundaram | @ Fowler Museum

For my second event, I went to Fowler Museum to view "Making Strange: Gagawaka + Postmortem" exhibit by Indian contemporary artist Vivan Sundaram. Unfortunately, I was declined by the staff to take pictures with them so I resorted to taking a picture with the sign instead.

Figure 1 - Me at "Making Strange" at Fowler Museum

As soon as I entered the exhibit, I was reminded of Gunther von Hagens’ “Body Worlds”, except instead of real cadavers, they were thankfully all mannequins. Many of the exhibits involved said mannequins cut in half to reveal the insides and dressed up with seemingly random junk. After watching a short video at the exhibition, I found out that Sundaram used this “trash” as a “starting point of creativity” which also helped create an “anti-aesthetic” feel. While Sundaram admits that these objects are trash, I found that they definitely served some deeper purpose; for example, the dress in Snake-shell is in fact made of X-ray film which connects to his other works which involve looking within the human body.

Figure 2 - Snake-shell, 2011
X-ray film

Another piece that follows this theme is Immunity Cover which consists of fabric surgical masks pieced together. Surgical masks also tie in with the dissecting of bodies; I think it’s really clever that Sundaram designed it like armor since they are supposed to protect you from bacteria and disease.

Figure 3 - Immunity Cover, 2011
Nonwoven,micro-dot fabric surgical masks

As mentioned above, many of these pieces were dissected mannequins, often abstract and not scientifically accurate. Wired Torso attempts to mimic the arteries and veins of a human body albeit not accurately, though it succeeds in showing how grotesque our insides can be. A lot of these works reminds me of Week 4’s topic of “Medicine+Technology+Art”; Sundaram obviously had some prior knowledge of the human anatomy and used his knowledge in medical technologies to his advantage creating unique artworks.

Figure 4 - Wired Torso, 2013
Mannequin, fiberglass, body organs anatomy samples, wire, paint

One piece that I found most interesting is Acrobat because of the way in which the body is distorted. The ballerina wearing a skirt made from cotton fabric seems to be striking a pose, but what’s curious is the fact that she seems to have three breasts in various positions. I think this might symbolize the movement of the mannequin as if Sundaram is trying to capture different frames of the body in motion.

Figure 5 - Acrobat, 2013
Mannequin, fiberglass body organs/anatomy samples, cotton fabric, iron, ceramic, paint, wood

Spine is another piece that shows that without knowledge of anatomy, artists can never “present the human body on a more disquieting stage”. “Making Strange” opens our eyes to not just what is underneath the skin, but the relationships between the human body, clothing, and fashion.


Figure 6 - Spine, 2013
Mannequin, fiberglass body organs/anatomy samples, paint, wood
Figure 7 - Holdall, 2011
Leather handbags, stuffing
Citations
  • Making Strange: Gagawaka + Postmortem Description, Fowler Museum. Personal photograph by author. 2015.

Friday, May 29, 2015

Week 9 | Space + Art |

I've always been curious about outer-space and mankind's role in the grand scheme of things. As Carl Sagan melancholily states in an excerpt from A Pale Blue Dot that "our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged position in the Universe, are challenged by this point of pale light". That is, Earth, being “a very small stage in a vast cosmic arena”, potentially holds absolutely no significance in the universe; after understanding that, how can anyone on this “mote of dust” believe themselves to be in any way more important than another inhibiting the same “dot”.

Figure 1 - "Pale Blue Dot"
http://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/posts/2014/02/Pale_Blue_Dot_615_labeled/064c463bf.jpg

Charles and Ray Eames’ Powers of Ten also made quite an impact on me; it showed us that an individual is already a speck of dust at 100 meters wide, let alone 100 million light years away. However, it also showed us how our body ourselves look like galaxies seen at a microscopic levels; the “vast inner-space” of an atom after the clouds of electrons at 0.1 ångström interestingly looks eerily similar to outer-space at a million light years away. This fact reminded me of a “couch gag” from The Simpsons which was undoubtedly influenced by Powers of Ten; in the clip below, you’ll see the camera zooming out from Earth, then showing galaxies strangely turning into atoms, then into molecules, until finally zooming out to reveal Homer’s head. I found that to be an incredibly philosophical take on Powers of Ten, implying that we ourselves are the universe which interestingly contradicts Sagan’s view of mankind’s insignificance.

Figure 2 - The Simpsons Couch Gag featuring Powers of Ten


Watching these videos makes one realize that one’s accomplishments and failures are such miniscule events that should not be taken too deeply to heart; Sagan is truly right when he said that “astronomy is a humbling and character-building experience”.

Figure 3 - Powers of Ten images from video
http://urbanizedfilm.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/eames.jpg

Another point of interest for me when it comes to space is its portrayal in popular media. As Vesna notes in Lecture Part 6, “the amount of space exploration fantasy and fiction is just phenomenal” resulting in many different depictions of outer-space and aliens over many decades. In movies like E.T., aliens are shown to be friendly and curious creatures while in movies like Invaders from Mars or War of the Worlds, aliens are shown to be aggressive intellectual invaders, attempting to research and conquer humans. As a writer for Metacritic describes it, “the idea of a threat from another world has always touched a nerve in audience, giving them the thrill of being scared and the satisfaction of seeing humanity…triumph”. In later years, media would instead portray aliens and humans in a more comedic light, often negating differences between aliens and humans entirely as seen in Futurama and Men in Black


Figure 4 - One of my favorite movies, Men in Black
https://fanart.tv/movie/607/men-in-black/

Citations
  • Eames, Charles, and Ray Eames. "Powers of Ten (1977)." YouTube. YouTube, 26 Aug. 2010. Web. 29 May 2015. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fKBhvDjuy0#t=431>.
  • Sagan, Carl. "Carl Sagan - Pale Blue Dot." YouTube. Ed. Patrick Mylund Nielson. YouTube, 19 July 2011. Web. 29 May 2015. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PN5JJDh78I>.
  • "Simpsons Couch Gag on the the High School Classic "Powers of 10""CollegeHumor. N.p., 14 Mar. 2005. Web. 29 May 2015. <http://www.collegehumor.com/video/46485/this-is-so-funny>.
  • Space Pt6. Perf. Victoria Vesna. N.p., 30 May 2012. Web. 29 May 2015. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=13&v=VYmOtFjIj0M>.
  • Thompson, Mike. "10 Alien Invasion Movies Worth Watching (and 5 to Avoid)." Metacritic. N.p., 09 Mar. 2011. Web. 29 May 2015. <http://www.metacritic.com/feature/best-and-worst-alien-invasion-movies>.

Sunday, May 24, 2015

Week 8 | Nanotech+Art |

Having not too much interest or knowledge in science subjects like physics and chemistry, I felt this week’s lectures on Nanotechnology to definitely be new ground for me. The most interesting part of the 6 lectures was when Dr. Gimzewski talks about the nanotechnology products, in specific nanoparticles. Going back to the Ancient Roman times, the “Lycurgus Cup” was quite fascinating to me because not only was it beautiful, but also showed me that nanotechnology isn’t something invented in modern times, but has been used for millennia. I further researched the Lycurgus Cup since I found it surprising that ancient Romans could even use nanotechnology without advanced equipment, and how did they even know what effects it would have? Turns out that they “impregnated the glass with particles of silver and gold, ground down until they were as small as 50 nanometers in diameter” according to the Smithsonian Magazine. It further turns out that this 1600-year-old usage of nanoparticles has actually been a mystery to scientists until the 1990s, and that “this effect offered untapped potential” because of its capabilities of changing color; planned uses include diagnosing diseases and “thwarting terrorists trying to carry dangerous liquids onto airplanes”. 


Figure 1 - Lycurgus Cup (left unlit/right lit from behind)
http://thumbs.media.smithsonianmag.com//filer/phenomenon-Glow-With-Flow-631.jpg__800x600_q85_crop.jpg

A more modern use of nanotechnology would be the use of silver nanoparticles which have an “anti-microbial” effect, used in socks and food bags. It’s surprising to know that my socks contain silver in them, and the fact that that silver is helping to stop bacteria and microbe growth in my sportswear. However, as Dr. Gimzewski notes in Nanotech Jim pt6, there are some dangers with using nanoparticles in everyday life. For example, he explains that “Slim Shake Chocolate”, a diet milkshake, uses “silica nanoparticles coated in cocoa clusters to increate taste”; after additional research I found out that nano-silica has the potential to cause pregnancy complications in mice, and thus “has raised health safety concerns, especially for pregnant woman”.  


Figure 2 - Slim Shake Chocolate by Nanoceuticals
http://corall-clubs.com/components/com_jshopping/files/img_products/full_819882.jpg

Digressing from the lecture videos, I found something I learned in Physics 10 to be of some interest in the relation to Nanotechnology and Art. On the topic of atoms and molecular structure, we learned that scientists use a “scanning tunneling microscope” to measure atoms that measure “just a few nanometers in diameter”. The resulting image (as shown below) reminded me a lot of the “Brainbow” from last week’s lecture, and how science inadvertently can create such colorful pieces of art.  


Figure 3 - "Here they have positioned 48 iron atoms into a circular ring in order to "corral" some surface state electrons and force them into "quantum" states of the circular structure. The ripples in the ring of atoms are the density distribution of a particular set of quantum states of the corral." - IBM's "STM Image Gallery
http://spiff.rit.edu/classes/phys314/lectures/stm/corral_top.gif


Citations

  • Jarreau, Paige Brown. "The Downside of Nano: Pregnancy Complications."SciLogscom. N.p., 07 June 2011. Web. 25 May 2015. <http://www.scilogs.com/from_the_lab_bench/the-downside-of-nano-pregnancy-complications/>.
  • Merali, Zeeya. "This 1,600-Year-Old Goblet Shows That the Romans Were Nanotechnology Pioneers." Smithsonian Magazine. N.p., Sept. 2013. Web. 25 May 2015. <http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/this-1600-year-old-goblet-shows-that-the-romans-were-nanotechnology-pioneers-787224/?no-ist>.
  • Nanotech Jim Pt3. Perf. James Gimzewski. YouTube. YouTube, 21 May 2012. Web. 24 May 2015. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=472&v=X0HCNiU_108>.
  • Nanotech Jim Pt6. Perf. James Gimzewski. YouTube. YouTube, 21 May 2012. Web. 24 May 2015. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PL9DBF43664EAC8BC7&t=92&v=oKlViSKkPd0>.
  • Richmond, Michael. "The Scanning Tunneling Electron Microscope." N.p., n.d. Web. 24 May 2015. <http://spiff.rit.edu/classes/phys314/lectures/stm/stm.html>.

Sunday, May 17, 2015

Week 7 | Neuroscience + Art |

The study of brain, mind, behavior, consciousness, otherwise known as neuroscience, is an “exploding field” as Vesna puts it, with neuroscientists attempting to solve age-old questions like “why do we behave the way we do?” and “how do we remember?” But what is the brain and how does it differ from the mind? Well, according to Professor Michael Levine, “the mind is what the brain does” being a “result of the overall activity of the brain”. Historically, the mind was thought to be something more abstract, maybe even a “soul”, while the brain itself is more simply thought to be a “complex organ specialized to carry out major acts of living” such as movement, reproduction, and adaptation (Levine).

MRI
Figure 1 - "An MRI scan highlights areas of activity"
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/apr/29/neuroscience-guide-vaughan-bell

Having studied neuroscience and psychology here at UCLA, I had not heard of any direct connection neuroscience has to art so this week’s lecture has been an eye-opening lesson for me. In Art, Mind, And Brain, Howard Gardner explains the “mystery of artistic creativity” and its links to the development of the brain of a child to an “artistically stunted” adult. What I find most enjoyable about his book is the lack of scientific jargon; Gardner often describes his complex and scientific thoughts using layman terms. Gardner states that a child “does not fully appreciate the rules and conventions of symbolic realms”, whereas adults “[are] fully cognizant of the norms embraced by others”; what this means to me is that while artistic adults can be trained to think outside-the-box, children don’t even have a box to repress their thoughts and creativity in the first place.

Figure 2 - Howard Gardner's Art, Mind, And Brain: A Cognitive Approach to Creativity
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41Fu3XJJDQL._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg
Another aspect of that intrigues me is the way neuroscience is used to actually create art. Vesna mentions an artist called Suzanne Anker who created a collection of works, “fMRI Butterfly”, in which images of butterflies were superimposed onto brain-scans, creating a “subtle optical illusion” (Vesna). In Science and Society: Neuroculture, Giovanni Frazzetto explains that these were not just optical illusions but somewhat of a test of “underlying neurological processes at work in perception”.

Figure 3 - Butterfly in the Brain, 2007 by Suzanne Anker
http://www.suzanneanker.com/artwork/?wppa-album=4&wppa-photo=275&wppa-occur=1
While not intentionally created as an art piece, the “Brainbow” has nevertheless showed the world how beautiful neuroscience can be. The “Brainbow” technique was developed by the Harvard Center for Brain Science in which “each individual nerve cell [was labelled] a different color to identify and track axons and dendrites over long distances” (Harvard CBS). The result is a colorful explosion of rain droplets which both intrigue and creep me out a little considering all of this is actually within our head. 

Figure 4 - Hippocampus CA1 by J. Lichtman
http://cbs.fas.harvard.edu/usr/connectome/brainbow/brainbow2.2.jpg

Citations

  • Center for Brain Science at Harvard University. "Brainbow." Brainbow. Center for Brain Science at Harvard University, n.d. Web. 17 May 2015. <http://cbs.fas.harvard.edu/science/connectome-project/brainbow#>.
  • Frazzetto, Giovanni, and Suzanne Anker. "Science and Society: Neuroculture." Nature Reviews Neuroscience 10.11 (2009): n. pag. Nov. 2009. Web. 17 May 2015. <http://www.suzanneanker.com/wp-content/uploads/2009-Anker-Suzanne-Giovanni-Frazzetto-Neuroculture-Nature-Reviews.pdf>.
  • Gardner, Howard. Art, Mind, And Brain: A Cognitive Approach to Creativity. New York: Basic, 1982. Google. Web. 17 May 2015. <https://books.google.com/books?id=2BMDYRRF1WcC&dq=gardner+%22art+mind+and+brain%22&printsec=frontcover&source=web&ots=DYaIMCGy4j&sig=8yrvOMWISopSrN_fNXsYqUPJCgw#v=onepage&q=gardner%20%22art%20mind%20and%20brain%22&f=false>.
  • Levine, Michael S., and Joseph B. Watson. Lecture 1 - Introduction to the Brian and Brief History. Los Angeles: n.p., n.d. PPT.
  • Neuroscience-pt1.mov. Perf. Victoria Vesna. YouTube. YouTube, 17 May 2012. Web. 17 May 2015. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=598&v=TzXjNbKDkYI>.

Event 1 | Light, Paper, Process: Reinventing Photography | @ The Getty Center

For my first event I decided to go to see some exhibitions at the Getty Center, having never been there before. While the design of the museum was amazing, out of the many exhibits at the Getty, one especially caught my attention, the Light, Paper, Process: Reinventing Photography exhibition featuring the works of Matthew Brandy, Marco Breuer, John Chiara, Chris McCaw, Lisa Oppenheim, Alison Rossiter, and James Welling. Unfortunately, photographs were not allowed inside the exhibit, so I took note of any piece that I found interesting, and attempted to find pictures of them online. 

Figure 1 - Me at the Getty Museum Entrance


Figure 2 - Me at the Getty Information Desk Figure 3 - Exhibition Entrance (no photos allowed)

This exhibition focuses on experimentation with photography; not things like changing aperture or shutter speed on a digital camera, but physically exploring and investigating photography’s “essential materials”. This includes experimentation with the chemical processing of photographic paper, photogram and solarization techniques, or even building home-made cameras with specialized lenses.


What this exhibit really reminds me of is the Two Cultures section of this class because of the contrast between these physical experimental works of photographic art and the Instagram-style, random filters photography that has become so popular nowadays. For example, John Chiara hand-built a huge camera which he then physically entered, using his hands to burn and dodge the image to achieve an effect that I thought only possible through filters. 

Figure 4 - Mirador at San Pablo, 2008 by John Chiara
http://mpdrolet.tumblr.com/post/6979152395/mirador-at-san-pablo-2008-john-chiara

Marco Breuer, on the other hand, subjected light sensitive paper to abrasion, burning, and scraping of the emulsion layer, making his pieces look very abstract. I found it hard to believe that these weren't created using digital technology, and I think I liked his work the most because of that.


Figure 5 - Untitled (C-539), 2005 by Marco Breuer
https://www.artsy.net/artwork/marco-breuer-untitled-c-539
Figure 6 - Untitled (C-1214), 2012 by Marco Breuer

Alison Rossiter created her work using one of the most interesting methods which was to use expired photographic paper instead of cameras or film.  As you can see below, traces of old on the surface created the effect of “cloud-strewn skies” which appeared so natural. 

Figure 7 - Eastman Kodak Azo F4, expired February 1922, processed in 2010 (#1) by Alison Rossiter
https://www.artsy.net/artwork/alison-rossiter-eastman-kodak-azo-f4-expired-february-1922-processed-in-2010-number-1

What I find so interesting is how these pieces were not Photoshopped or digitally touched in any way; everything was achieved through hands-on trial and error. In this day and age, photography has become so much more digitalized; it is almost a requirement for good photographers to be able to utilize Photoshop to make their photographs more artistic. These artists, however, have defied the predominant norm of using digital technology, and have proved that using practical methods to manipulate their pictures have just the same capability to inspire and awe their viewers. Many times I found myself amazed that such works could even be created without the use of digital editing, and learning about how each piece was made just inspired me more. This exhibit undoubtedly furthered my understanding of Two Cultures because of the similarities and differences I could see between digitally-altered and physical-manipulated photographs by artists working today. 

Citations

  • Heckert, Virginia, Marc Harnly, and Sarah Freeman. Light, Paper, Process: Reinventing Photography. Illustrated ed. N.p.: Getty Publications, 2015. Web. 17 May 2015.