What intrigues me in the Sydney Walker’s article is the process he describes when Jennifer Barnet created her works: she set up rules or followed the rules in her original works but then she jumped out of restrictions and utilized all kinds of recourses to get out of the trap she set for herself. All these struggles of creating, improvising and innovation serve only one purpose: the big ideas. All artists are trying to expand their works instead of prolonging the popularities of them, that’s how and why we appreciate masterpieces.
One thing I don’t quite understand is that from my previous knowledge, artists are meant to use more emotions than rationalities. Normally I can’t tell too much logic in paintings and it’s their imaginations that impress people. But why at the first stage of producing creations, artists still need to learn how to control the images they are creating? Isn’t it a waste of energy and inspiration? Or just most of the artists are hard working instead of natural geniuses?
The denotations and connotations Terry Barrett tries to explain can be compared to the subject matters and big ideas when interpreting the fine arts. it amazes me how descriptive and meaningful a single magazine cover can be and how immense the information can be conveyed to readers. Our brain must be highly functioned and well-trained to help us understand so many connotations unwittingly.
What I don’t agree is the discussion the students engage in about the sexually appealing images on rolling stone cover. The way they dress themselves shows the female power, the desire to show their healthiness and great confidence to concur a territory of their own in this male-dominated society, which is to the contrary of showing their weakness and shallowness.
No comments:
Post a Comment