 |
| I honestly don't remember where I got this… |
What am I doing here — with this blog? Analyzing things, putting my analysis into words, and making my words public. But to what avail? The form of analysis is one I am very familiar with, but I have never felt the need to put it into writing and share it with the world. It feels like nothing more than a pretentious gimmick. Oh but it's analysis, which automatically makes it too deep for gimmicks, right? That is exactly it, the gimmick in and of itself is the false image of depth conveyed by the mere idea of analysis.
I suppose the issue is not so much the existence of the laws themselves, or the unnecessary analysis of the forms in regards to such laws. But instead, it is an issue of who has the means —the knack— and who has the desire but lacks the means. Wielders of the knack can choose to whether or not they desire to use it, and if they do choose to use it then the next step is to polish it with some practice. Those who have the drive but lack the means, however, are condemned to analyze the work of those who do. They analyze it to the point that they develop postulates as to what defines "good" art or "good" design. They continue to analyze until they feel like they have derived laws to define what is good and what is bad. Then they either try to replicate it, or spend the rest of their lives writing about it.
wooaaa...u're being critical in thinking...aren't u? @_@
ReplyDeletePretentious gimmick? It's just a blog, dude. Most people don't read it. It's more like a public diary. Oh, but this one we have to turn in for a grade.
ReplyDeleteStatues within which you refuse to restrict your work? Well, design is mostly about selling yourself to an audience. I guess your first audience is your professor & classmates so, these "statues" would just be a test before the 'real world.' If you want less restrictions, maybe you'd like art studio better? I dunno.
What classes have you taken?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSounds like more people read your blog than you think!
ReplyDeleteIn regards to whether analysis is just a plaything for critics or some kind of intellectual masturbation, I think it's just important to remember that many people who create (those with "the knack") find analysis to be helpful, especially in a field like design. It's true that there is a lot of subjectivity to any art, but a "good design" is one that does what it set out to do - usually one that gains your audience's understanding and interest. Analyzing the design is necessary to step outside your own relationship to the design, for example. Analysis can be utilitarian, rather than "deep."
Hah, cool you guys read it. Though Ryan didn't seem to appreciate my "analysis," how sad. :\ But yeah man, the word was "statutes." And I'd have to shoot myself in the head if I had to list all the classes I've been through, which is why I referred to myself as a "career" art student but let's just say I've taken more art AND Design classes than you could count on your fingers and toes, and maybe the fingers and toes of a few of your buddies combined. And I've been working in the art and design field semi-professionally for a few years already, which is why the class has been a breeze. I'm honestly just itching to get through to the upper level courses so I can actually DO more of something. Which is kind of why I usually bs the "group conversations" in class lol. But yeah, if you're actually curious to know what I've taken, we could talk about that in person or something next time. I just find it laborious to have to list what i've been through. But I totally wouldn't mind a a conversation about etching or silkscreen or figure drawing or fashion design/illustration or something.
ReplyDeleteBut yeah, Evan I dig your comment. But That's not really what I'm talking about. I suppose I should go into further depth in another post? What I mean by wielders of the knack working without requiring special analysis is that they can look at a work and decide whether or not it's "balanced" or has good "rhythm" or if the colors are working together the serve their purpose without thinking about having to pull out their designer dictionary and find the words "balance" or "rhythm." And I would argue that the best designers in history never cared about the terms with which we use to refer to a pieces elements, or the scientific methods which have been proven to be able to manipulate the viewer in whatever way. But at the same time I don't deny that some who have embraced it (usually in a playful or curious manner) have come up with some interesting pieces. But then again, those tend to be gimmicky in and of themselves.
Oh and I have a feeling I'm coming off as kind of pompous, but I'm really not. Just kind of bored with the content of the class so far I suppose. lol But the format has been kind of cool. I mean it's kind of a pretentious long winded way of explaining line shape form texture space color value harmony unity contrast balance repetition emphasis proportion, etc but Housefield manages to make it more interesting than it really is haha
ReplyDeleteoh yeah and i forgot to mention I already have a degree in art xD I really don't want 2 :P lol
ReplyDelete