iwtba

Tag: art history

  • What is Art?

    Mariko Mori, 1995
    Birth of a star

    Intro

    Recently, I was at an art museum with one of my close friends, and as we walked around, I had a few thoughts. Art museums are rapidly changing, yet they also have long-standing traditions. I feel like this juxtaposition is quite interesting, specifically in the time period we are in now, because of the introduction of AI as well as the attitudes that are being circulated around social media. I have already written an entire post about AI effects on art and what my opinions are, but it has come up a lot in my thinking recently because I have had multiple experiences where I have suprisingly come across AI art, one of those times being at my local art museum, for me this was quite enraging, it feels as though the gallery has completely undermined its entire purpose, and the meaning of the other art that surrounds “AI assisted art” has been lost. This made me think about what it actually means to create art, what constitutes art, and what is subject to criticism as “not art.” The world is ever changing, and this concept follows suit, so I thought it would be interesting to discuss what is constituted as art and what is not.

    Cindy Sherman, 1990
    Untitled #228

    Photography

    Photography is one of the most accessible forms of creativity that surrounds us. Billions of people have access to a built-in camera in their phones, and relatively inexpensive options for photos, such as Polaroids or digital cameras. Because of this normalized level of access and the creative utilization of cameras, most people would if not all, would consider photography to be art. However, this was not always the case. Photography was invented and introduced to the public in the mid-19th century. In its infancy, there was a large debate surrounding whether photographs could be considered art; this debate and shift in how we think about art, and what art can be, is one of the most significant in contemporary art history. What makes photographs have artistic value? Does that differ from the artistic value given by paintings or sculptures? The implementation of photography expanded the borders of what could be considered art, rather than just being an objective view of the world around the photographer. Photographs can also tell stories, invoke emotion, and be incredibly powerful.

    Wassily Kandinsky, 1923
    Circles in a circle

    Abstract Art

    Abstract art has always been controversial; some people believe it has lesser artistic value than traditional representational art, and some believe it can instead be the highest form of artistic expression. The birth of pure abstraction is usually credited to Wassily Kandinsky, a Russian painter who worked mainly in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Famously, his pieces portrayed an impression based on music that was played while he painted. He painted what he felt visually embodied the music that he heard while painting. Though his work was groundbreaking and beautiful (also one of my personal favs), it most likely was not the first of its kind. In the same time period, a little before Kandinsky, Hilma af Klint worked, but her work was not revealed until 50 years after her death, as per her request, so the birth of abstraction is not accredited to her. Hilma af Klint’s artwork was wonderfully nonsensical and mystic. I plan to write a more detailed post about her because I simply cannot cover it quickly.

    Hilma af Klint artwork

    With this little art history lesson done, let’s get down to why abstract art is being included in this post. There is a first instance of every new method or new idea, and oftentimes, trying new things that are out there and creative is usually met with criticism. Even now, many people don’t “Get” abstract art. They see abstract pieces and say things like “I could have painted that,” yeah.. so? One of the main purposes of abstract art is to show the audience something, obviously. Rather than just showing them seemingly random shapes and colors that do not necessarily require a high level of artistic skill to accomplish, their purpose is to portray a feeling, an emotion, an experience, etc. However, it is not always easy to find these meanings. If you are not very interested in understanding the artist’s intent, you simply won’t. The appreciation of abstract art requires intention. You can look at a beautiful landscape and say, “Wow, that is such a breathtaking mountain.” But it requires some deeper thought to think and say, “Well, what are the colors of the sky supposed to make me feel? Why is the mountain the focal point? What is in the details?” This same logic can be applied to abstract art. You might just see shapes and colors at first, but what does that actually represent? What is the meaning behind the color, the composition, and the title?

    Marina Abramović, 1974
    Rythymn 0

    Performance Art

    Performance art is an art form that has been increasingly under fire in the last few years on the internet, mostly from social media accounts that are trying to sell mass-produced products and mask them as handmade for profit. an example of this would be a sample of a video of a performance art piece with the caption “modern art” and then showing fake videos of process for whatever shitty product they are trying to sell along with a caption saying “my art * insert stupid little crying eyes emoji” this is problematic for multiple reasons, one being it is purposefully deceiving people into buying mass produced items using other people’s art and process, and the main issue I will focus on, insinuating that “modern” (Not even categorizing it correctly) performance art is less than, worthless, dumb, or not real art. despite this rise in marketing strategy, and the constant pushback that is on artistic communities for what is considered real art, performance is artistic expression.

    Mariko Mori, 1994
    Tea Ceremony

    Art at its core is expression, and the human body can demonstrate a myriad of emotions and meaningful experiences. Often, performance pieces are meant to reflect something about human nature, society, or other innately human experiences, both the good and the ugly. We all have a body; it is something that brings us all to a place of understanding because of this. When someone cuts their finger, you can understand the certain type of pain that getting a cut on your finger can cause. The same concept applies with performance art: as the artist uses their body, showing both physical and metaphorical feeling, pain, and emotion, the viewer is able to put themselves in that position, which can be incredibly powerful. The body in itself is constantly expressing and communicating to others, so I would argue that even the human body in itself is art, performance art.

    Nam June Paik (백남준), 1971
    TV Cello

    In the end, art is subjective. It is up to each individual to decide what they enjoy and what they dislike, but it is also important to understand that within that subjectivity, we cannot decide what is worthy of recognition, and what art is or is not. Art is inherently expansive and ever-changing, so as viewers and participants, we sometimes need to look at art in a non-traditional way. For any artists: continue to create, even and especially if it pushes the boundaries of what exactly art is. 🙂

  • Nudity in art.

    “Mother and Child” by Gustav Klimt

    Intro

    Nudity in art has been a historically debated topic, especially surrounding the nudity of women in art and the acceptability of that within different societies. Through this post I will be looking at female nudity concerning the perspective of a Western audience and the implications and traditions that come with the beliefs of a Western society. For most of Western history, women were not allowed to act as nude models for bodily study due to it being “indecent” for a woman of honor and value. Women were also barred as artists from studying nude models for their own art up until the late 19th – early 20th century; before then, women relied on other art as well as clothed models, while men worked freely with live models. The reason for this, as I simply stated before, was because it was deemed indecent and impure for a woman to be studying the naked form or “showing off” her body in that way. The acceptability of the nudity of women in art tells us much about the society that surrounds art. How censored is it? Are these bodies seen as inherently sexual or inherently divine?

    “The birth of Venus” by Sandro Botticelli

    A nude body is not a new idea in the long history of artistic traditions and motifs that our world has. But for most of that history, female nudity was used as symbolism. A naked woman could symbolize an idea (Liberty leading the people); a naked woman could symbolize a goddess (The birth of Venus), but never could a naked woman symbolize a naked woman, a real woman. The female nude was always attached to an ideal, attached to the idea of a woman, of how a woman should be. A goddess, a good omen, a value, but never an actual woman, overshadowing the natural beauty and the natural strength of a living, breathing, real woman. When you think about famous paintings like the one above me, how many of them are woman-centered, and how many of them make you think about what the subject thinks rather than just how she looks? This is quite interesting in the context of how our society has evolved and changed. How have we historically valued women? Do we value women only when they embody something we value, or do we value women for being a person, a being with their own ideals and values?

    “Olympia” by Edouard Manet

    We may look at this artwork with little to say other than it looks similar to thousands of other paintings with the familiar subject of the “reclining female nude,” but this painting caused quite a bit of controversy when it was released to the high society Parisians of 1865. This is a painting, not of an imaginary idyllic woman or a goddess, but a painting of a real woman, a real woman that was in fact a prostitute. This painting caused a stir because of its subject matter and the way in which that subject matter interacted with the audience. Manet was highlighting and honoring a woman that in French 19th-century society would never be honored or valued in this way, a sex worker, looking directly at the viewer, not a passive subject to be desired or gazed upon, but an active subject with a presence and a story. It (hopefully) does not seem crazy to a current-day audience that a woman can be an active subject, someone that is part of their own story in artwork and not just an object of men’s desire, but think about this in the context of the culture of the time. To paint and show this to an upper-class and posh 19th-century audience was a bold move, especially considering the fact that many of the men looking at this painting were meeting with women like Olympia constantly. Also notice how, though her profession is something sexual, she is not placed in an overtly sexual position; she is resting, just existing in her naked body. This artwork, though controversial, was not controversial for its racial dynamics and racist undertones, which also tell us about the ideals of 19th-century Europe. Art is a reflection of its time, so in turn we need to recognize this and critically analyze it when given the opportunity.

    “Crouching woman” by Camille Claudel

    Nudity strips subjects of timeline and wealth; without clothing to show their worth, everyone is the same. Nudity also shows vulnerability and emotion in a way that is unlike anything else. The way that the human body moves when it is naked and there is nothing to mask how the subject feels is incredibly honest in its self-expression. You can see the muscles of a body contort in pain, a crumpled brow, and a clutch of the chest; all of these things are visual language in which we as the viewer can understand the experience of the subject. In history, many times, nudity was even used to show defeat; a naked enemy was vulnerable, defeated, and embarrassed. The way our society is structured enforces that our naked bodies are vulnerable, they shouldn’t be shown to others casually, and when that is stripped from us, there is nothing left but raw emotion. In her artwork, Camille Claudel conveys emotions so intensely through the body that you can feel the feeling of the statue, even though that’s all it is—a statue. But… it isn’t just a statue; it is a vessel of Camille’s own pain and emotions, and it tells a story that we can universally understand. The body has its own language; no matter where you are from, how old you are, or what race you are, everyone has a body and can understand that language.

    “The Coiffure study” by Mary Cassatt

    All but one of the other examples in this post are paintings that have been done by men, with women as the subject. But how does the portrayal of the female body differ when it is not for a man? How does the nude woman act in art when she is just existing without the thought of the male gaze? This painting beautifully shows the experience of a woman untouched by the expectations of a man-centered society. This painting shows a woman in her own world, in an intimate setting, which we are not a part of. There is no performance for the viewer; her body is just existing in a space that she is comfortable in. She faces away from us, ignoring the fact that the viewer is seeing her chest, because it doesn’t matter; she is existing in a way that doesn’t concern the sexualization that her body could be subjected to if she existed in a male-centered world, because she isn’t. Women’s perspectives are freeing; they show what it feels like to exist as a woman, and that is incredibly important in a world where women are expected to do and be so much.

    “Woman 1” by Willem De Kooning

    This painting is probably not what you think of when you think of a woman; the face feels distorted, the body feels traditionally unfeminine, and it may even feel a little unsettling to look at. The process of this painting is quite interesting and may shed some light on why this painting is the way it is. Though this painting was done by a man, I think many women could resonate with the qualities of this work. De Kooning created this work by layering paint over itself and spreading and smearing paint while painting this figure over and over again. This process feels haphazard and almost crazed; my own interpretation of this process, as a woman myself, feels like the experience of existing as a woman in a patriarchal society. Women shape and smear and paint themselves to fit into a society that has unachievable and ever-changing expectations of them: look like this, dress like this, weigh this much, talk like this… Through this process you can lose who you are, who you want to be, and how you want to be. There is so much pressure on women to be and do everything, and that is exhausting; it can feel as though you’ve turned into something you don’t even recognize. This painting may not invoke the same feelings for you as it did for me, but I think it is worth thinking about, especially if you are not a woman.

    “Venus of Willendorf”

    This little gem of a lady is a figure that was found in the early 20th century. It is a Paleolithic era figure, found in Austria alongside other figures similar to it. Looking at this image, it is clearly a figure of a woman, with emphasized reproductive organs and a full figure. I included this because I want you to think about societal beauty standards. What does that mean for us, and what has that meant in the past? In the Paleolithic era, many similar figures from all over the world have been found, and based on these images and statues, we can deduce what a “perfect” female form meant to them, which seems quite different from what we think of in Western society as “the perfect” body. Even in the examples I have shown in this post, there are varied bodies and ideals; society is always changing, and ideals are always changing as well, and that is proof that bodies are subjective. One body is no greater than another, yet societies place women on a scale and decide their value based on what they look like. Just as art is subjective, bodies are too, and I hope you keep that in mind when you look at yourself and others in the mirror of social beauty and expectations.

    “Lying with the wolf” by Kiki Smith

    Outro

    You may have noticed that in all of my examples, I did not use photography; this brings up an interesting dilemma within art education. Because of our current society, a lot of nudity is deemed crude, with the exception of fine art. The idea of a body is more digestible for the mass Western audience than the physical and real representation of a body through a photo. Because female bodies and nude bodies in general are heavily sexualized through a western lens, the line between art and pornography is blurred easily; what may be intended as art can be perceived in a pornographic way even if the intention of the artist is not to convey sexuality. I urge you all to keep an open mind about how you yourself perceive naked bodies; it is my belief that they are not inherently sexual, an image of a naked body is not always for the pleasure of the viewer, and I hope you could understand that a bit more through all I said in this post.

    Count how many times I said nude in this post, bye bye!

    Extra

    https://awarewomenartists.com/en/decouvrir/la-representation-du-nu-entre-affirmation-et-subversion/