Nam June Paik

          There were a few major thoughts I had while watching the documentary on Nam June Paik. First of all, I was impressed at how diverse of an artist he is. He paints, he sculpts, he performs. It is difficult enough to perfect one art form, but he seems to be able to do everything. He can take any random object, such as a guitar or a television, and transform it into art piece, and that is incredible.
          I also love that all of his pieces are alive. The shots of the hundreds of television screens all stacked on top of each other was the first one that caught my attention. Every image that came on one of the screens was bright and colorful, and the constant changing of the images made the televisions active and alive. I also enjoyed the "Global Groove" Korean dance that the video showed for a short time. The intensity of the music, the bright green background, and the energetic movements of the dancer all combined to make the piece engaging. Also the "Global Groove" TV Cello incorporates television, music, and technological effects to create an interesting piece filled with color and sound. All of these art pieces are so lively that you can't take your eyes off of them. I can clearly see why Nam June Paik is the father of video art.

Above is a picture of the "Electronic Superhighway". I think this piece perfectly embodies Nam June Paik's artistic style because he has taken the technology of television and mixed it with sculpture. The TV's are arranged in a way that creates the image of the continental United States, and the vibrant colors and energy that radiate from this piece captivate the audience and basically embody Nam June Paik's art as a whole.

Flash Mob

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8tJoIaXZ0rw
I was watching "500 Days of Summer" last night and this scene reminded me of the flash mobs we talked about in class. Obviously it's not a real flash mob because it was choreographed and scripted in a movie, but it still embodies the general idea of people joining together and performing in a decontextualized space. I love this scene!

Xerox Project

This project was a creative interpretation of the human body in an unexpected form. I used my dad's printer to make copies of my body parts, including my face, my hair, my arms and legs, my feet and hands, and my stomach. I then spent hours meticulously cutting my body parts out, and then brainstormed how to display them.

I have always had a love of music, and I wanted to integrate the copies of my body with something that relates to music. My favorite instrument is the piano, but I realized it would difficult to find a piano that I would be allowed to turn into a work of art. Instead, I borrowed one of my dad's many acoustic guitars because it was convenient and accessible. I did not plan any of the arrangements of my body cut-outs on the guitar, it just flowed. I taped pieces down in a way that was visually appealing, and covered the entire guitar. It ended up almost representing the human body with the face at the top, the arms and hands near the middle and on the neck, the stomach in the middle of the front, and the feet and legs near the bottom. I am very pleased with how it turned out.

Archetypes

          I learned about archetypes in my english classes in high school because they show up a lot in literature. An archetype is a basic model or pattern that can be copied or represented. In literature, there are certain archetypes that appear in different stories through the representations of different characters. I think because archetypes represent a general idea or pattern, its easy for stereotypes to arise because people have some sort of preconceived notion of what something is. There is already an idea in their head, and that's where stereotypes come from. If people can destroy their expectations and stereotypes then there would be a lot less discrimination in the world. Without archetypes, people can have a more open mind and just accept someone for what they are.

Sheryl Oring

          One of my favorite things about Sheryl Oring is how she takes words and turns them into her artwork. She get real life people to share their personal feelings and ideas, and I love how she displays the connections with people in her pieces. "Writing Home" and "I Wish To Say" both get so personal with people we consider strangers, yet after reading them you feel like you know them. You get insight into the relationships between family members in "Writing Home" and it has such a personal touch that you can't help but feel emotionally connected to the letters. 
          Not only do her projects unveil emotion and relationships, they are also a form of interactive media. She allows the audience to become part of her piece, and she forms a bond between the people that write letters for her. The fourth wall is not only broken, but the people in the audience are also the artists because it is their words that make the art. 
          Another way Oring involves the audience is in the piece "Rilke's Offerings". By placing letters addressed to "A Young Poet" all over the city, she is inviting any random passerby to get involved. Any reader who opens a letter is then given the power because they can choose what to do with it. They can throw it away, respond, or start a similar project of their own. Oring is spreading her ideas in such a way that might inspire other people to do the same.

Howl

          It only took me a few paragraphs of this article to realize that the argument was ridiculous. First of all, the supposedly inappropriate content of the poem "Howl" is nothing compared to what is on the internet today. Anyone can access inappropriate material online at any time, and it's not like people have never been exposed to that type of content before. Everyone knows what sex and drugs and booze is, and if someone feels uncomfortable with those things that they can choose not to listen to "Howl".
          But the part of this article that angered me the most was when the former FCC Commissioner Glen O. Robinson said "Maybe the commission would look differently on it if we were talking about Shakespeare, but Ginsberg isn't Shakespeare."
          Why is Shakespeare allowed to talk about inappropriate topics in his plays but Ginsberg isn't? Some of the content in Shakespeare's writings were just as bad if not worse than what Ginsberg writes in "Howl", and there were no censorship issues back in the sixteenth century. If people stop worrying about what is acceptable and what isn't acceptable and just focus on the art, we wouldn't have controversy over silly things like fines. Just focus on the art. 

Brion Gysin

          Brion Gysin was an artist born in England, but his true artistic talent didn't flourish until he moved to Paris in 1934. Here he became involved with Surrealism, joining the Surrealist Group along with Dali, Man Ray, and Duchamp. Later on in life, he joined the U.S. army in WWII, learned Japanese and calligraphy, and opened a restaurant. 
          While his life was full of achievement, Brion Gysin is most well-known for two artistic projects. The first is the cut-up technique, which he worked on with William Burroughs. They would write on paper, then cut the paper up and put it back together, creating a new, creative piece of writing. This completely relates to the Exquisite corpses we did in class. Like Gysin and Burrough's creations, our drawings combined different elements that were not suppose to go together and the outcomes were incredible. Gysin's cut-up technique displays the idea that art and beauty doesn't have to be planned out. You can take totally unrelated images or words and align them so that they naturally create new meaning.
          The second well-known Gysin art form is the Dreamachine. This is a flickering cylindrical device that resembles a strobe light, where the pulsating light coming from the machine creates bright patterns behind the viewer's closed eyes. It seems to work almost like a drug or like hypnosis; the viewer is transported to a new world with strange colors and images. Some think the dreamachine is harmful because it can cause seizures, but I think it is definitely a form of art. Art is supposed to get a reaction out of its viewers; it is supposed to make the audience feel and experience something. That is exactly what the Dreamachine does. Some people may have bad reactions to it, but not everyone is going to experience art the same way. As long as people have some sort of connection with the Dreamachine, it is a powerful piece of art.