I like in the article where McCall talks about time affecting perception on art. He mentions how most traditional art has a "perceivable beginning and end, with boundaries..." An interesting point, as his artworks repeat and last for hours on end. It's not something you see everyday, to go into an exhibit and have a completely different reaction to it depending on the time of day. McCall's article kind of corresponds with our previous reading, about an infant's eye, free of bias or personal experience.
While I find this all interesting and a good way to stretch your brain, I also disagree with mocking traditional art for its "boundaries" or "perceivable beginning and end." Everyone experiences are in their own way, and this could include something as stationary as a statue or painting. This article seems to go with the concept that art doesn't have to be pretty or appealing, or pleasing to the eye. To an extent I understand that idea, as the idea or meaning of an artwork is incredibly important. However I personally appreciate traditional art forms that are aesthetically pleasing. These videos are great to open up your mind and expand your horizons, but sometimes they're extremely difficult to relate to or understand.
No comments:
Post a Comment