The first video I watched was Greenberg on Art Criticism. I enjoyed this video because it compared art criticism to criticism of music. Greenberg pointed out that music was easier to criticize because musicians emote through their music and an actual score can be observed. With art, it is much more difficult to subjectively criticize. I think this is important to my art criticism project because it gave me a whole new perspective on art criticism as a whole.
The next video I watched was Greenberg on Pollock. I thought this video was interesting because I got to learn about Jackson Pollock whose artwork I find mysterious. It was interesting to learn that, although Pollock rejected the easel, he continued to use it throughout his career. I also learned that there was a very specific technique to making his paintings look the way they did, and even if they came out correctly, sometimes they just "did not work for the eye." I didn't think this one was very relevant to art criticism, even though there was a section in the film about it. I still enjoyed learning about Pollock either way.
The next video I watched was An Introduction to the Italian Renaissance. I thought this video had good intentions, but ultimately, I would have rather preferred a straightforward video about criticism rather than a skit. All in all, I learned that artists would "never have been able to create the works they did" without examining the masterpieces of the artists before them. My favorite part of the video was learning about "sfumato" which was used on the Mona Lisa. I think this was fairly relevant to my art criticism project and I am going to try to find influence from artists that may have influenced our self portraits.
The next video I watched was The Critics: The Story from the Inside Page. I thought this video was interesting because it examines the similarities between critics and reporters. Being a musician, I appreciated the segment on Paul McCartney. A critic might say, "Paul performed well on his new songs but could have done better on his early Wings material." They also might comment on how "trippy his piano was" or how interested the crowd seemed to be. Overall, I think this video was important to my art criticism project because it helped me understand that we're not just looking at the art, we're looking at everything connected to the art.
The next video I watched was The Colonial Encounter: Views of Non-Western Art and Culture. I thought his video was interesting, but not very relevant to criticism at all. I thought the segment on sexual exploitation of indigenous women was the most interesting segment, as I can see how scientific research and exploitation can run a fine line in this sort of situation. I don't think this video was very valuable towards my art criticism project, except that I also learned that tools can be considered an art form, not just traditional paintings and pottery, etc.
Finally, I watched Jackson Pollock. I thought his video was very relevant to art criticism, as they examine how Pollock is considered a "master" but that his work is often used as a way to describe a "low point" in modern art. I also found their discourse on "Lavender Mist" to be extremely descriptive and detailed - it is important to realize that so much can be taken away from something that many would consider so abstract that it simply looks like scribbles. Overall, I think this piece was very valuable to art criticism, as it allowed me to see that some people might consider an artist a master while others might consider them hacks.
No comments:
Post a Comment