Tag Archives: Task 7

Three Published Images

Leave a reply

William Eckersley in his project “Dark City” captured the connection people have to the city of London during the day creating a new feeling and story along the way. “The stage is devoid of its human players and seems to showcase the scenery’s forgotten beauty, revealing a stark and otherworldly aesthetic in a city drained of its occupants” (Williameckersley.com, 2017). This shows us that Eckersley is painting a picture of how the passer can view London, by highlighting the things that are typically shadowed when the sun is out. Taking away the sprawling human community that would typically pollute vision, allows for us to see deeper into the visuals that the city provides us. We can see the detail in each slab of stone on the floor, the dirt that contaminates the frames on the windows and highlights all of this with the inorganic lights producing cold blues and warm oranges all creating a different feeling and connection to the city.

Uta Barth on the other hand detaches us from the safety of seeing what is around us. Instead we are left to interoperate what is there, to really think about what it is why see and not only that think about the feelings that it provokes. “The primary effect of the blur in her photographs is to make a specific image generic” (Tate, 2017). In doing this Barth makes the image more about making the viewer more aware of the conscious activity of looking. Instead of using a camera to take a sharp and crisp image she has used it to create an almost Abstract Expressionist painting.

Rut Blees Luxemburg similarly to Eckersley captures during the night, but in her instance focussing on “that which is slightly on the side and on the margins” (Mint Magazine, 2017). In doing this Luxemburg produces a story for a particular thing that the details of which would typically be looked over or ignored. This creates a new connection to the subject that the viewer may not have had before seeing the images she captures.

 

 

References

 

Williameckersley.com. (2017). WILLIAM ECKERSLEY » Projects / Dark City (2011). [online] Available at: http://www.williameckersley.com/projects/dark-city/ [Accessed 21 Dec. 2017].

Eckersley, W. (2011). Dark City. [image] Available at: http://www.williameckersley.com/projects/dark-city/ [Accessed 21 Dec. 2017].

Barth, U. (1997). [image] Available at: http://utabarth.net/work/ground/#image-4 [Accessed 21 Dec. 2017].

Tate. (2017). Uta Barth born 1958 | Tate. [online] Available at: http://www.tate.org.uk/art/artists/uta-barth-2678 [Accessed 21 Dec. 2017].

Mint Magazine. (2017). An Interview With Photographer Rut Blees Luxemburg. [online] Available at: http://www.mintmagazine.co.uk/art/an-interview-with-photographer-rut-blees-luxemburg/ [Accessed 21 Dec. 2017].

Luxemburg, R. (2003). Tyson/Bombardier. [image] Available at: http://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/blees-luxemburg-tyson-bombardier-p20267 [Accessed 21 Dec. 2017].

Task 7 Histories

Leave a reply

Leo Steinberg’s talk Other criteria: The Flatbed Picture Plane 1968 explores the alteration of the angle of the picture plane and the shift in art from natural to cultural expression this signified in terms of Rauschenberg’s work.  In Richard Serra’s talk at Yale University in 1990 focuses on his own practice and it’s interactions with process and art history and the dilemmas posed by the conceptuality of site specificity.

Both texts suggest that the discussed artists did not follow the existing precedent of theory. Serra says of his own works ‘The history of welded sculpture in this century has had little influence ‘ while Steinberg  remarks that ‘Even as Abstract Expressionism was celebrating its triumphs… [Rauschenberg] proposed the flatbed or work-surface picture plane as the foundation of an artistic language that would deal with a different order of experience.’ As such, both texts portray the work of these atists as turning points for the art of their practice; new ways of thinking in painting- Rauschenberg , and welding sculpture- Serra. A key difference between the texts could be that while Steinberg is reflecting on Rauschenberg’s works from a third person perspective, Serra is commenting on his own work and it’s position in art history. This could mean that the works of Rauschenberg are being explored in the way that art history needs them to be seen rather than the artist’s intended interpretation. However it could also be that Serra is placing his own work in to art history and therefore his portrayal is not the way it would be understood in the context of art history by a viewer or historian.

While there is a great deal to be discussed in comparing these texts, the question that personally holds the most interest is what causes art to be a turning point in the contemporary? How the artist intends to be seen, or how the viewer consumes their work both immediately and historically? Perhaps they are two sides of the same coin and art theory remains fluid even after the fact.

Research and Communication Skills: Reflection and Review

Leave a reply

Over the last semester I was tasked to produce essays on topics covered in lectures. With a 500 word limit per essay, I was terrified from the get-go, however the experience, not without its difficulties, has been enlightening in regards to my understanding as a game designer.  

The first issue I had was that I would tend to choose the question pairs that I had the fullest understanding of without much research involved. Retrospectively I would have like to push myself a little more instead of staying in my comfort zone – it might have resulted in really interesting research that brought to light subjects I hadn’t considered before. That said, as the semester progressed, the quality of my research increased and deepened as I became more enthusiastic about what I was doing.  

My process from lecture to end product was as such: I would take notes during the lectures (despite the slides being readily available to me I find I absorb more by re-processing what’s being discussed, and it gives me the ability to note down topics that I found particularly interesting), and then take to the internet when it came to doing the research. Admittedly, I never once used the library facilities, which is something I would really like to do in the future as I think it could unearth some unusual commentary on different subjects. By the last few essays, however, I was looking less at Wikipedia pages and more at scholarly articles and credible newspaper reports, which helped to further deepen my understanding through absorbing other people’s opinions.  

Two subjects that took my particular interest, which are close-enough related that I’ll discuss them together, were HCI and AI. Whilst other topics such as the history of indie gaming really helped me to appreciate the context in which I’m currently playing and designing games, HCI and AI unpacked the actual logistics of the games I’ve played in the past – purely for fun – and helped me consider them in a more critical, intelligent way. Learning about HCI specifically helped me to appreciate what it is that makes a game “flow” for me, after all, “a well-designed interface makes the video game experience more fun” (Fox, 2005). My hope is that having a deeper understanding of these things will increase my integrity as a designer, having the ideas and opinions of other people in the industry under my belt.  

The referencing of other’s work, however, was a bit of a challenge for me. I’m wildly opinionated, and while I am perfectly capable of crediting others for their contribution to those opinions, it’s not a habit for me, so this project was challenging in the way that it required me to back up my ideas with specific examples from others. If I were to do it again, I would include references from the start to achieve a more airtight argument. 

I enjoyed this project. I think it stretched and challenged me, and while there are areas I could improve on I’m proud of the work I’ve produced and all the research that went along with it. 

 

Reference list: 

Fox, B. (2005) Game Interface Design. Thomson Course Technology PTR. 

 

Helpful links: 

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/4869/a9cc94292332faee0b9e741bc93419d155a5.pdf 

Caroline Perkins: Task 7

Leave a reply

1 Leo Steinberg “from other criteria”.   (Charles Harrison, 1992)                                                                                                Steinberg talks about a shift in the picture plane from the “old Masters practice of using of devises to draw attention to the art.  Steinberg talks about development in this practice using the term flatbed picture plane which started in the 1960’s it changes the way a picture is represented in relation to the vertical nature of the human view point, which Steinberg calls world space. He cites Richard Rauschenberg as the first proponent of this style of seeing. A clear example of this would be 1955 when Rauschenberg smeared paint on his own bed and up righted it against a wall.   Steinberg says, “The flatbed picture lends itself to any content that does not evoke a prior optical event`” this development refers to the difference in context between now and in the middle ages.    A picture can now be conceived as an image of an image no longer an image of worldview.

2 Richard Serra from “The Yale Lectures” (Charles Harrison, 1992)                                         This lecture was in response to a ruling made against Serra where he cited that a removal of a piece of work from its site-specific place was an unjustifiable suppression of the right to freedom of speech – an act of censorship.

Serra stated that the specificity of the site oriented works is depended on and inseparable from their location. (Charles Harrison, 1992) therefore, removing the piece was tantamount to destroying it as it could not be recited.    The specificity  of site –oriented works implies that they are conceived for dependent on and inseparable from their location (Charles Harrison 1992). In 1989 the piece tilted arc was removed from the federal Plaza in NYC. Serra talks of the difference between sculpture being the development of a piece by using material brought together to create a work where the difference between site specific is that the material should be interdependent to the location not separate from it this was new thinking in that time in 1990.

Steinberg explains that as Rauschenberg subverts the picture planes he also is shaking up the “art connoisseurs” position as the proponent of good taste and aesthetics, the self-appointed keepers of commercial success for artists therefore a representation of authority. This links to Serra who talks about commerce as meeting consumerist needs.  He says that an artist can stand outside the submission to authority by making work that is not sponsored by corporate, or political manipulation by making work that is not commercial. Serra suggests that site specific works that are made for a specific location and don’t lend themselves to be sold onto another location suffer from lack of commercial value.Therefore, is not submitting to the authority of commerce.

If artefacts do not accord with the consumerist needs of people if they don’t submit to exploitation and marketing strategies they can be voted ad hoc into oblivion.   In Rauschenberg’s case, he was able to move the thinking forward which made way for a wider range of artefacts to enter into the commercial art world.

Charles Harrison, P. W., 1992. Art in Theory An anthology of Changing Ideas. 2nd Edition ed. Oxford: Blackwell.