A VISUAL RESPONSE - INITIAL IDEAS

I thought that it was a rather peculiar, yet an interesting task. I didn't think that creating a visual response of certain topics would be challenging. Though I'm honestly not sure where I would go with visually representing politics as it is a rather translucent subject. 

Started off with a brief mind-map

Ideas/Concepts

Topic: POLITICS

Line - barbed wires, boundaries (where authorities draw the line?), authority/power (follows blindly/their opinions are the most significant, hence is what the public listens to, like a straight line), weight of an opinion/law/rule (who's right and who's wrong?)

Shape - minimalistic (propaganda posters or symbols for political parties), democracy (collections of shapes/objects), abstract or vague information (visualised through obscure /abstract shapes), political correctness (shaping people's minds to a certain idea)

Colour - solid block colours (Red and Yellow for the Communist party, Green for Islamic groups), translucent (censorship), transparency, right or wrong, the grey area (vagueness)

Collage - conflicting opinions, views or values (collaging different materials or media to represent different voices/thoughts), democracy (collection of things, majority)

COP LECTURE - PRINT CULTURE 2

Thoughts

• Everything nowadays seem to be very fast paced. We live in a contemporary society where most things are digital and mechanically done. 

• The lecture discuses about mass production and economic profit, typically in fashion. Though I think that it might not be the most important factor? I personally think that with this particular way of living (or working) it loses the meaning and essence of putting more thought and process into your work (creative or not). Then again, these are two things that needs to be considered. 

Inside Out - Salvador, Brazil

Chiang Mai, Thailand

JR

http://www.jr-art.net/projects 

• He was brought up during the lecture and I thought that his works were inspiring and innovative. He somehow still manage to use print, yet exploits the internet culture. He doesn't entirely reject the capitalist and digital culture and creates an impression through his artwork. 

• It's interesting to see art apart from the control of galleries and museums. In a way the digital world is gradually taking the audience/society out of the traditional context. Relating to the previous post, when art is put out publicly, out of the comfort zone, people would immediately respond/critique.

• There was a quote from Walter Benjamin at the end of the lecture discussing about the politics of art, how technology kills the 'aura' (elitist, creating the illusion of inferiority), it's taken out of tradition, it's considered democracy and no longer a private property, art comes to us and makes it 'human again'. 

• I personally thought that it is such a powerful statement and there is some truth in it. Art now and then are different in some ways due to the changes in capitalist society and the digital world. 

COP LECTURE - PRINT CULTURE!

Thoughts 

(Personal opinions included. Thus I may be wrong at some things.)

• I think that I particularly enjoyed this lecture because it made me question a few things regarding the art world. 

• It's interesting to know that there was segregation between social classes as well as in art, such as comparing 'high art' to 'commercial art' (industrial revolution may have changed things)

• In some ways I think that in this day and time, it's not too different. There would always be an invisible barrier between fine artists and commercial artists. Perhaps some would presume fine art to be rather an 'elite' form of art. Though what I find particularly interesting is that commercial art is what surrounds us at the moment, maybe due to the consumerist culture, society and technology

Recycling artworks

• It made me wonder if a piece of artwork is recycled, would it loose meaning? For instance, the Mona Lisa had now become an iconic figure, famous for the monotonous face. 

• Also putting art into galleries. It just happen to struck me at how it actually change the way people behave towards particular artworks. Though what made me think is that what is the difference with putting an artwork in a frame and hung up in gallery and any other public art? Both impact the audience in a certain way, though I feel that art that is open to the public is much more influential and impactful. 

• I feel that it is where people get to openly think and speak, respond. That is perhaps what I find art interesting. 

Print Capitalism 1842 & William Morris 'The Lesser Arts'

• His opinion on this matter is rather intriguing. His work seem to focus on nature, humanity and not the industries. 

• I suppose it's true that popular culture is dominating art and whatever is economically beneficial would generally be favoured. I have to agree with the idea of having mindless, cheap and profitable work to be a waste for talented creatives. 

• The Lesser Arts - printing, textile, crafts, graphic design, illustration, why are they lesser? It also made me think and consider what really defines/make art? Some may argue that commercial art reduces status as they simply create work to produce money. 

• Whereas William Morris simply wanted to level the culture and bring about equality. Though looking at it in a certain way, fine artists and commercial artists are somewhat similar. Perhaps one works around meaningless, profit driven art and the other leans towards a pretentious, elitist art. Something to think about (?)