It looks like this podcast has ended some time ago. This means that no new episodes have been added some time ago. If you're the host of this podcast, you can check whether your RSS file is reachable for podcast clients.
Steve Aishman Photography
Discussions of contemporary art and photography.
Episodes
A Report from the Phantom Zone
0s · Published
Every hero becomes a bore at last.
-Emerson
I have never been able to throw. And I mean anything. I can’t throw a baseball, tennis ball, Frisbee, whatever. Don’t ask me to toss you a pen or a coin because you’re likely to have to spend more time reaching under the couch to try to find it than just asking me to walk it over to you. It’s also rather dangerous asking me to throw anything in your general direction because I could put your eye out, the eye of the person next to you or just break a lamp. I don’t even try to play sports where I have to throw because everyone just gets frustrated with me as they have to continually jump over fences or run across roads to retrieve my horribly targeted missiles. Dogs don’t even want to play catch with me because it is simply no fun.
However, I love to watch the Red Sox. I love watching Pedroia or Youkilis make perfect throw to first base and just beat out a runner by milliseconds. The problem is that now I have to apologize for enjoying watching someone make a great throw. I have to say something like, “I know it’s just a game, but I find it exciting and uplifting”. If I don't, someone will attack me. Someone will say something like, “That’s stupid.” “Baseball is a waste of time.” “If you like baseball then you’re clearly sexist.” Etc. Etc.
It used to be that enjoying something was a good thing. I remember when having a hero was something that was encouraged. Now if you say anyone is your hero, it opens up a floodgate of ridicule. A hero should be someone we can admire without apology, but most people have secret heroes. People we aspire to be like, but don’t dare tell anyone about.
The art world is a good example of this. Who would say that Damien Hirst is their art hero? He’s hugely successful and influential, but to say you want your career to be like his is an open invitation to being attacked. Marina Abramović’s show at MOMA just opened and it will feature a performance piece that will be the longest that she has performed a single solo piece. I would love to see the piece, but I would never say that a performance artist is a hero of mine because so many people hate performance art (usually without seeing it) and it takes too long to defend why I love performance art. This year’s Whitney Biennial is filled with great artists, but it is dangerous to say that you think of any of them as an art hero.
It’s possible that there are no more art heroes (or maybe heroes at all). No Michelangelos or Rodins who it is ok to call a hero in the art world. Someone to draw inspiration from … Someone to aspire to …
Is there someone you consider your art hero?
Someone you feel you don’t have to apologize for liking?
If so, please list them in the comment section.
(And if you’re really bold … leave your name!)
Marina Abramović
Damien Hirst
-Emerson
I have never been able to throw. And I mean anything. I can’t throw a baseball, tennis ball, Frisbee, whatever. Don’t ask me to toss you a pen or a coin because you’re likely to have to spend more time reaching under the couch to try to find it than just asking me to walk it over to you. It’s also rather dangerous asking me to throw anything in your general direction because I could put your eye out, the eye of the person next to you or just break a lamp. I don’t even try to play sports where I have to throw because everyone just gets frustrated with me as they have to continually jump over fences or run across roads to retrieve my horribly targeted missiles. Dogs don’t even want to play catch with me because it is simply no fun.
However, I love to watch the Red Sox. I love watching Pedroia or Youkilis make perfect throw to first base and just beat out a runner by milliseconds. The problem is that now I have to apologize for enjoying watching someone make a great throw. I have to say something like, “I know it’s just a game, but I find it exciting and uplifting”. If I don't, someone will attack me. Someone will say something like, “That’s stupid.” “Baseball is a waste of time.” “If you like baseball then you’re clearly sexist.” Etc. Etc.
It used to be that enjoying something was a good thing. I remember when having a hero was something that was encouraged. Now if you say anyone is your hero, it opens up a floodgate of ridicule. A hero should be someone we can admire without apology, but most people have secret heroes. People we aspire to be like, but don’t dare tell anyone about.
The art world is a good example of this. Who would say that Damien Hirst is their art hero? He’s hugely successful and influential, but to say you want your career to be like his is an open invitation to being attacked. Marina Abramović’s show at MOMA just opened and it will feature a performance piece that will be the longest that she has performed a single solo piece. I would love to see the piece, but I would never say that a performance artist is a hero of mine because so many people hate performance art (usually without seeing it) and it takes too long to defend why I love performance art. This year’s Whitney Biennial is filled with great artists, but it is dangerous to say that you think of any of them as an art hero.
It’s possible that there are no more art heroes (or maybe heroes at all). No Michelangelos or Rodins who it is ok to call a hero in the art world. Someone to draw inspiration from … Someone to aspire to …
Is there someone you consider your art hero?
Someone you feel you don’t have to apologize for liking?
If so, please list them in the comment section.
(And if you’re really bold … leave your name!)
Marina Abramović
Damien Hirst
We were unable to find the audio file for this episode. You can try to visit the website of the podcast directly to see if the episode is still available. We check the availability of each episode periodically.
A Report from the Phantom Zone
0s · Published
So I’m looking at Titian’s “Venus and the Lute Player” when I overhear a discussion being led by a teacher and some students:
Teacher - “What do you think this painting is about?”
Student A. – “It seems to be about whether beauty is better apprehended through sight or through sound.”
Student B. – “I think it’s just another example of pre-19th century art that assumes one single point of view of what beauty even can be. I mean seriously, another nude white woman as the object of beauty …”
Student A. – “I think you’re confusing social commentary with art. The piece is not supposed to be social commentary, it’s supposed to be beautiful. You can’t just substitute aesthetic beauty with irony and call it art the way a lot of artists try.”
Student B – “That may be true, but all standards of judgment are based at least in part in some kind of cultural bias. Beauty maybe the most biased of all and so without framing Titian’s biases we risk marginalizing and silencing virtually everyone else’s concept of beauty.”
Student A- “But it is too easy to just deconstruct the piece that way. Anyone who isn’t smart enough to build a building can spend their whole life simply burning them down. After deconstruction, there needs to be re-construction.”
Teacher –“So what can we do now to acknowledge the insight that all judgments are relative and context-dependant but still be able to move forward and appreciate this work of art?”
Student B –“ Why don’t we just use relative terms where the standards of judgment are not unilaterally applied as they were in the past, but explicitly stated and acknowledged to be immersed in the culture in which they arise.”
Student A –“ So we integral mode of criticism that includes context as an essential part of any judgment. Thus we can judge a piece based on the notion of beauty that exists in our culture. This allows me to make the judgment that Titian’s “Venus and the Lute Player” is more aesthetically beautiful than Duchamp’s “Fountain”. I can even go on to say that it is probably as provocative and controversial about notions of beauty because it does pose the question: Which is more beautiful, visual art or music?.”
Student B –“That sounds fine as long as everyone understands that the hierarchy you just created is inherently value free and that it is context driven. It has to be acknowledged that you are working with a continuum of sliding judgments and sliding contexts.”
Teacher – “Exactly, then we can move forward by understanding that we are no longer evaluating work based on one single standard, but there are some standards that have to be framed before the discussion can really begin.”
Titian’s “Venus and the Lute Player”
Duchamp’s “Fountain”.
Teacher - “What do you think this painting is about?”
Student A. – “It seems to be about whether beauty is better apprehended through sight or through sound.”
Student B. – “I think it’s just another example of pre-19th century art that assumes one single point of view of what beauty even can be. I mean seriously, another nude white woman as the object of beauty …”
Student A. – “I think you’re confusing social commentary with art. The piece is not supposed to be social commentary, it’s supposed to be beautiful. You can’t just substitute aesthetic beauty with irony and call it art the way a lot of artists try.”
Student B – “That may be true, but all standards of judgment are based at least in part in some kind of cultural bias. Beauty maybe the most biased of all and so without framing Titian’s biases we risk marginalizing and silencing virtually everyone else’s concept of beauty.”
Student A- “But it is too easy to just deconstruct the piece that way. Anyone who isn’t smart enough to build a building can spend their whole life simply burning them down. After deconstruction, there needs to be re-construction.”
Teacher –“So what can we do now to acknowledge the insight that all judgments are relative and context-dependant but still be able to move forward and appreciate this work of art?”
Student B –“ Why don’t we just use relative terms where the standards of judgment are not unilaterally applied as they were in the past, but explicitly stated and acknowledged to be immersed in the culture in which they arise.”
Student A –“ So we integral mode of criticism that includes context as an essential part of any judgment. Thus we can judge a piece based on the notion of beauty that exists in our culture. This allows me to make the judgment that Titian’s “Venus and the Lute Player” is more aesthetically beautiful than Duchamp’s “Fountain”. I can even go on to say that it is probably as provocative and controversial about notions of beauty because it does pose the question: Which is more beautiful, visual art or music?.”
Student B –“That sounds fine as long as everyone understands that the hierarchy you just created is inherently value free and that it is context driven. It has to be acknowledged that you are working with a continuum of sliding judgments and sliding contexts.”
Teacher – “Exactly, then we can move forward by understanding that we are no longer evaluating work based on one single standard, but there are some standards that have to be framed before the discussion can really begin.”
Titian’s “Venus and the Lute Player”
Duchamp’s “Fountain”.
We were unable to find the audio file for this episode. You can try to visit the website of the podcast directly to see if the episode is still available. We check the availability of each episode periodically.
A Report from the Phantom Zone
0s · Published
“Art writing that attempts not to judge, and yet presents itself as criticism, is one of the fascinating paradoxes of the second half of the twentieth century." James Elkins
In 1970, Edmund Burke Feldman wrote a book called “Becoming Human Through Art” that proposed four elements of art criticism:
1. Description
2. Analysis
3. Interpretation
4. Judgment
The Feldman method of art criticism begins with description, where the art critic uses neutral language to describe 1. recognizable subjects, 2. visual elements and their qualities (form), and 3. technical qualities of a work of art. The second part of art criticism, analysis, consists of describing the relationship among the things that were previously listed. Interpretation is where the critic infers what the connections between various visual elements mean. Finally, judgment is where the art critic makes a statement about the value of a piece of work based on a stated context.
The central element of Feldman’s methodology of art criticism was the notion that clearly grounding criticism in a philosophy of art would allow the art critic to justify critical judgments.
Feldman used three types of art philosophy as examples of how to use his method of art criticism:
A. Feldman identified Formalism as an art philosophy that evaluates work based the importance of the formal qualities and the visual elements of art. Therefore, a formalist art critic will focus their criticism on the visual elements of a piece. The formalist art critic rejects interpretations that rely on symbols, subject matter, previous knowledge or viewer’s life experience and will judge the piece based on technical execution and visual organization.
B. Feldman identified Expressivism as an art philosophy that evaluates work based on how well it accomplishes the goal of communicating a specific set of ideas. Therefore, an expressivist critic would evaluate a piece based on its ability to arouse emotion.
C. Instrumentalism evaluates work based on the importance of the social intention of the work. Therefore, an instrumentalist critic will evaluate a piece based on how well it serves social institutions like the church, the state, business, politics, etc. and will reject art that develops from or depends on other art as inferior and self-serving.
Feldman’s goal in outlining his method of art criticism was fundamentally for educational purposes. Feldman once said, "what an art teacher does - whether in art appreciation or studio instruction - is essentially art criticism. That is, art teachers describe, analyze, interpret, and evaluate works of art during the process of instruction." (Feldman, Some adventures in art criticism, Art Education : Journal of the National Art Education Association, p.24)
For most of the artists I know that occasionally write criticism as well, Feldman’s basic concept of art criticism as a part of education still holds true. Artists write about art in order to learn more about their own practice and to codify their ideas. The act of analyzing someone else’s exhibition forces artists/writers to look much longer and harder than they might otherwise and to form connections they might not have seen. To a large extent, Big, Red and Shiny was founded on the notion of artists writing about art in order to improve their own practice.
It seems the goal of art critics who are not also artists may have a host of other goals. Some of the goals I see expressed in other art critics include:
1. Art Criticism for Philosophers: The desire to pioneer and delineate a new art philosophy. In other words, the desire to expand from Feldman’s three basic examples to employ new philosophies. ( Arthur C. Danto seems to be an example of this type of critic.)
2. Art Criticism as Literature: The desire to use a work of art as inspiration for developing well-crafted or innovative writing.
3. Art Criticism as Politics: The desire to make a political statement through art criticism.
4. Art Criticism for Money: Participating the written branch of the economics of the art world.
5. Art Criticism for Fame: Writing so people will recognize the writer.
6. Art Criticism as part of Advertising: Writing to increase viewer participation in an exhibition.
Of course this is not an exhaustive link and most art critics have multiple goals as well. There are a number of websites that explain how to write criticism like eHow and others. But none of them emphasize the fact that goal of the writer should be clear. Similarly, the art philosophy or philosophies that the critic is using should also be clear. It should also be clear to the critic who is writing that it is in the area of judgment and application of art philosophy where reader of the criticism will either choose to enter a dialog about competing art philosophies or the discussion will descend into name calling. Any perceived crisis of art criticism seems to rest in the pularistic notion that opposing art philosophies can both be grounded in the sound application of equally empirical philosophies to works of art. When two equally grounded philosophies attempt to engage, the result can frequently descend into a cacophony.
So, for anyone interested in writing art criticism for any reason, know this: If you write criticism without judgment, it’s not criticism. If you choose to judge, back it up with a sound philosophy of art. After you publish what you write, get ready for someone to hate you and try to keep your philosophy down by yelling louder.
If you can think of any other reasons for writing art criticism or any philosophies that extend beyond Feldman’s examples, please post them in the comment section.
Good luck,
Steve
Some Critics
Danto
Krauss
Hickey
In 1970, Edmund Burke Feldman wrote a book called “Becoming Human Through Art” that proposed four elements of art criticism:
1. Description
2. Analysis
3. Interpretation
4. Judgment
The Feldman method of art criticism begins with description, where the art critic uses neutral language to describe 1. recognizable subjects, 2. visual elements and their qualities (form), and 3. technical qualities of a work of art. The second part of art criticism, analysis, consists of describing the relationship among the things that were previously listed. Interpretation is where the critic infers what the connections between various visual elements mean. Finally, judgment is where the art critic makes a statement about the value of a piece of work based on a stated context.
The central element of Feldman’s methodology of art criticism was the notion that clearly grounding criticism in a philosophy of art would allow the art critic to justify critical judgments.
Feldman used three types of art philosophy as examples of how to use his method of art criticism:
A. Feldman identified Formalism as an art philosophy that evaluates work based the importance of the formal qualities and the visual elements of art. Therefore, a formalist art critic will focus their criticism on the visual elements of a piece. The formalist art critic rejects interpretations that rely on symbols, subject matter, previous knowledge or viewer’s life experience and will judge the piece based on technical execution and visual organization.
B. Feldman identified Expressivism as an art philosophy that evaluates work based on how well it accomplishes the goal of communicating a specific set of ideas. Therefore, an expressivist critic would evaluate a piece based on its ability to arouse emotion.
C. Instrumentalism evaluates work based on the importance of the social intention of the work. Therefore, an instrumentalist critic will evaluate a piece based on how well it serves social institutions like the church, the state, business, politics, etc. and will reject art that develops from or depends on other art as inferior and self-serving.
Feldman’s goal in outlining his method of art criticism was fundamentally for educational purposes. Feldman once said, "what an art teacher does - whether in art appreciation or studio instruction - is essentially art criticism. That is, art teachers describe, analyze, interpret, and evaluate works of art during the process of instruction." (Feldman, Some adventures in art criticism, Art Education : Journal of the National Art Education Association, p.24)
For most of the artists I know that occasionally write criticism as well, Feldman’s basic concept of art criticism as a part of education still holds true. Artists write about art in order to learn more about their own practice and to codify their ideas. The act of analyzing someone else’s exhibition forces artists/writers to look much longer and harder than they might otherwise and to form connections they might not have seen. To a large extent, Big, Red and Shiny was founded on the notion of artists writing about art in order to improve their own practice.
It seems the goal of art critics who are not also artists may have a host of other goals. Some of the goals I see expressed in other art critics include:
1. Art Criticism for Philosophers: The desire to pioneer and delineate a new art philosophy. In other words, the desire to expand from Feldman’s three basic examples to employ new philosophies. ( Arthur C. Danto seems to be an example of this type of critic.)
2. Art Criticism as Literature: The desire to use a work of art as inspiration for developing well-crafted or innovative writing.
3. Art Criticism as Politics: The desire to make a political statement through art criticism.
4. Art Criticism for Money: Participating the written branch of the economics of the art world.
5. Art Criticism for Fame: Writing so people will recognize the writer.
6. Art Criticism as part of Advertising: Writing to increase viewer participation in an exhibition.
Of course this is not an exhaustive link and most art critics have multiple goals as well. There are a number of websites that explain how to write criticism like eHow and others. But none of them emphasize the fact that goal of the writer should be clear. Similarly, the art philosophy or philosophies that the critic is using should also be clear. It should also be clear to the critic who is writing that it is in the area of judgment and application of art philosophy where reader of the criticism will either choose to enter a dialog about competing art philosophies or the discussion will descend into name calling. Any perceived crisis of art criticism seems to rest in the pularistic notion that opposing art philosophies can both be grounded in the sound application of equally empirical philosophies to works of art. When two equally grounded philosophies attempt to engage, the result can frequently descend into a cacophony.
So, for anyone interested in writing art criticism for any reason, know this: If you write criticism without judgment, it’s not criticism. If you choose to judge, back it up with a sound philosophy of art. After you publish what you write, get ready for someone to hate you and try to keep your philosophy down by yelling louder.
If you can think of any other reasons for writing art criticism or any philosophies that extend beyond Feldman’s examples, please post them in the comment section.
Good luck,
Steve
Some Critics
Danto
Krauss
Hickey
We were unable to find the audio file for this episode. You can try to visit the website of the podcast directly to see if the episode is still available. We check the availability of each episode periodically.
A Report from the Phantom Zone
0s · Published
Artists and giving to charitable causes seem to go well together. The biennial ARTcetera art auction is a great example where Boston’s visual arts community has donated artwork and time to support the AIDS Action Committee since 1985. There are, of course, numerous other examples of charity art auctions across the globe for virtually every type of charity event. Most art auctions are supported largely by artist or collector donations and while every art auction is different, the quality of art and artists represented can be world class. The (RED) auction in 2008 raised $42.6 million to fight AIDS in Africa by auctioning works from artists like Banksy, Julian Schnabel, Jasper Johns and Robert Rauschenberg. Whitechapel Gallery’s charity auction in 2006 raised $5.2 million by auctioning works donated by artists like Carl Andre, Christian Boltanski, Angela Bulloch, Sophie Calle and many others.
Unfortunately, art auctions can also be sub-par displays of works that collectors or artists are trying to get rid of.
The reason why art auctions are popular and frequently successful is primarily because people want to donate to a cause, but also want to take something tangible home with them. Over the next year, charity art auctions to help Haiti will probably begin to pop-up as people stop donating directly to emergency aid foundations. So far, I have only seen one art auction where any artist can easily donate work to aid Haiti at:
http://140hours.com/
I don’t know anything about this auction or the people who are running it, so I can not recommend that anyone participate with this particular auction in anyway, but I can support the idea of artists donating work to charity art auctions for Haiti as a whole.
However, if you are an artist or collector who is asked to participate in a charity auction for Haiti, please do not contribute sub-par work. If every artist or collector donated excellent work for charity auctions, then people will be much more like to participate in future auctions.
If you know of any charity art auctions for Haiti, please list them in comment section. (Of course I can not vouch for anything posted in the comment section; always beware of donating or working with any charity.)
Banksy/Hirst piece sold at the (RED) Auction for $1,870,000 USD
TAKASHI MURAKAMI piece sold at the (RED) Auction for $1,650,000 USD
Unfortunately, art auctions can also be sub-par displays of works that collectors or artists are trying to get rid of.
The reason why art auctions are popular and frequently successful is primarily because people want to donate to a cause, but also want to take something tangible home with them. Over the next year, charity art auctions to help Haiti will probably begin to pop-up as people stop donating directly to emergency aid foundations. So far, I have only seen one art auction where any artist can easily donate work to aid Haiti at:
http://140hours.com/
I don’t know anything about this auction or the people who are running it, so I can not recommend that anyone participate with this particular auction in anyway, but I can support the idea of artists donating work to charity art auctions for Haiti as a whole.
However, if you are an artist or collector who is asked to participate in a charity auction for Haiti, please do not contribute sub-par work. If every artist or collector donated excellent work for charity auctions, then people will be much more like to participate in future auctions.
If you know of any charity art auctions for Haiti, please list them in comment section. (Of course I can not vouch for anything posted in the comment section; always beware of donating or working with any charity.)
Banksy/Hirst piece sold at the (RED) Auction for $1,870,000 USD
TAKASHI MURAKAMI piece sold at the (RED) Auction for $1,650,000 USD
We were unable to find the audio file for this episode. You can try to visit the website of the podcast directly to see if the episode is still available. We check the availability of each episode periodically.
A Report from the Phantom Zone
0s · Published
Top Ten Bad New Years Resolutions for a Stereotypical Artist
10. Don't roll eyes at people who ask if all my clothes are black ; just accept that they are jealous and move on.
9. Stop worrying if smoking is killing me ; Europeans have always smoked and they're all hot and skinny.
8. Don't listen to my mother who keeps “worrying that I’ll always be poor”; realize that I’m a Bohemian - a nuanced class of poor.
7. Less showers and more deodorant will save money on water bill.
6. Try to get to most or all of my court appearances this year.
5. Don’t get fired from more than four jobs this year even if my boss is nothing more than a wage-slave to the capitalistic pigs that own the corporation.
4. Cut back on drinking to just lunch, dinner, after dinner and late night .
3. Try to have most of my artwork done at least by the opening of the exhibit .
2. Stop feeling bad when gallery owners say that I’m “hard to work with,” they secretly love the drama anyway.
1. Try to convince at least one person that I’m not elitist, no matter how stupid, provincial, uncultured, uneducated, ignorant or boring they are.
Happy New Decade!
A typical Bohemian
Pigs from "Animal Farm"
10. Don't roll eyes at people who ask if all my clothes are black ; just accept that they are jealous and move on.
9. Stop worrying if smoking is killing me ; Europeans have always smoked and they're all hot and skinny.
8. Don't listen to my mother who keeps “worrying that I’ll always be poor”; realize that I’m a Bohemian - a nuanced class of poor.
7. Less showers and more deodorant will save money on water bill.
6. Try to get to most or all of my court appearances this year.
5. Don’t get fired from more than four jobs this year even if my boss is nothing more than a wage-slave to the capitalistic pigs that own the corporation.
4. Cut back on drinking to just lunch, dinner, after dinner and late night .
3. Try to have most of my artwork done at least by the opening of the exhibit .
2. Stop feeling bad when gallery owners say that I’m “hard to work with,” they secretly love the drama anyway.
1. Try to convince at least one person that I’m not elitist, no matter how stupid, provincial, uncultured, uneducated, ignorant or boring they are.
Happy New Decade!
A typical Bohemian
Pigs from "Animal Farm"
We were unable to find the audio file for this episode. You can try to visit the website of the podcast directly to see if the episode is still available. We check the availability of each episode periodically.
A Report from the Phantom Zone
0s · Published
The Storm and the Sculpture
The snowman is the quintessential piece of vernacular sculpture. True, people who don’t consider themselves artists also make sandcastles, bonfires and even Christmas lights can be viewed as vernacular installation art, but the snowman seems to hold a special place in both sculpture and culture as a whole. How many other types of sculpture have their own fully developed mythology with movies, books, songs, sub-characters, spin-offs, etc.? No one has ever heard of Sandy the Sandcastle Queen, but everyone can hum along to Frosty’s theme song. The snowman sculptural phenomenon is easily attributed to marketing for the holiday season (especially since Frosty was originally a Rudolph spin-off, who everyone knows was a Montgomery Ward marketing ploy), but snowmen are far more complex than other elements of the holiday marketing push.
Snowmen appear to be vaguely figurative and can be anthropomorphized, but it is easy to argue that snowmen are their own concept that actually has little to do with being a representation of a human. Ever seen a realistic snowman? Hyper-realistic snowmen are no longer snowmen, but rather figurative sculpture that happens to be made out of snow. Snowmen follow their own sculptural tradition that is always paired with social ritual. Ever made a snowman and then not come in to have hot chocolate? It would border on sacrilegious. Snowmen also function best as a communal sculpture-making endeavor since making a snowman alone seems to miss one of the purposes of why snowmen exist. Making snowmen is a winter bonding ritual between friends and family. For some children, finally being old enough to be allowed to participate in making the annual family snowman is a rite of passage.
Maybe people hold a special place for snowmen because they directly evoke complex associations with our own mortality. All snowmen are made with the knowledge that they will melt. Paradoxically, if snowmen lasted forever, no one would make them. They are made to have temporary lives; to die at the end of the season and then be re-born the next year.
Such a simple sculpture holds unbelievable meaning in our society. One of the most relevant elements about snowmen is that they are fun! Not many pieces of artwork can hold so much meaning while also creating so much pure joy and pride, no matter what the outcome. Every snowman I have ever made has been a complete failure and I have loved every part of them. Every photo album I have has a picture of my sister and me next too a terrible snowman made mostly of dirt and sticks; both of us with huge grins of pride.
The storm hitting New England right now will spawn armies of snowmen and I know I am looking forward to driving around and seeing as many as I can.
If you make a snowman this year, please take a picture of it and post a link to the picture in the comment section.
Frosty
Figurative snow sculpture or snowman?
A snowman like the kind I make
The snowman is the quintessential piece of vernacular sculpture. True, people who don’t consider themselves artists also make sandcastles, bonfires and even Christmas lights can be viewed as vernacular installation art, but the snowman seems to hold a special place in both sculpture and culture as a whole. How many other types of sculpture have their own fully developed mythology with movies, books, songs, sub-characters, spin-offs, etc.? No one has ever heard of Sandy the Sandcastle Queen, but everyone can hum along to Frosty’s theme song. The snowman sculptural phenomenon is easily attributed to marketing for the holiday season (especially since Frosty was originally a Rudolph spin-off, who everyone knows was a Montgomery Ward marketing ploy), but snowmen are far more complex than other elements of the holiday marketing push.
Snowmen appear to be vaguely figurative and can be anthropomorphized, but it is easy to argue that snowmen are their own concept that actually has little to do with being a representation of a human. Ever seen a realistic snowman? Hyper-realistic snowmen are no longer snowmen, but rather figurative sculpture that happens to be made out of snow. Snowmen follow their own sculptural tradition that is always paired with social ritual. Ever made a snowman and then not come in to have hot chocolate? It would border on sacrilegious. Snowmen also function best as a communal sculpture-making endeavor since making a snowman alone seems to miss one of the purposes of why snowmen exist. Making snowmen is a winter bonding ritual between friends and family. For some children, finally being old enough to be allowed to participate in making the annual family snowman is a rite of passage.
Maybe people hold a special place for snowmen because they directly evoke complex associations with our own mortality. All snowmen are made with the knowledge that they will melt. Paradoxically, if snowmen lasted forever, no one would make them. They are made to have temporary lives; to die at the end of the season and then be re-born the next year.
Such a simple sculpture holds unbelievable meaning in our society. One of the most relevant elements about snowmen is that they are fun! Not many pieces of artwork can hold so much meaning while also creating so much pure joy and pride, no matter what the outcome. Every snowman I have ever made has been a complete failure and I have loved every part of them. Every photo album I have has a picture of my sister and me next too a terrible snowman made mostly of dirt and sticks; both of us with huge grins of pride.
The storm hitting New England right now will spawn armies of snowmen and I know I am looking forward to driving around and seeing as many as I can.
If you make a snowman this year, please take a picture of it and post a link to the picture in the comment section.
Frosty
Figurative snow sculpture or snowman?
A snowman like the kind I make
We were unable to find the audio file for this episode. You can try to visit the website of the podcast directly to see if the episode is still available. We check the availability of each episode periodically.
A Report from the Phantom Zone
0s · Published
Somewhere along the way, rules got a bad name.
People began to associate rules with authority and oppression of freedom.
Rules are now seen as antiquated obstacles to individualism and progress.
Artists in particular decided that following any rules meant total subordination of personal liberties to potentially dangerous social institutions. Artists now fear that if any rules are allowed to even be uttered without immediately being contradicted, that there will be a return to social domination like the infamous degenerate art exhibition of 1937 or Lenin’s Izo-Narkompros where totalitarian social institutions attempted to dictate the rules of art for everyone in society.
The notion that rules can function as efficient ways of passing knowledge that require judgment before following and not blind adherence seems to have withered as fear of totalitarianism has risen.
A total rejection of all rules is fueled by fear. Fear of loss of individuality, fear of loss of freedom, fear of loss of the notion of self, fear of loss of liberty, etc. Perhaps the fear is well founded, or perhaps there is nothing wrong with rules as long as the focus is on judgment, not adherence.
Rules are _not_ meant to be broken; they are meant to be guides that the informed can choose to follow or break depending on the situation, not just always broken.
Here are some rules that may evoke vehement objection or vigorous endorsement. Either way, they are not meant to apply to every situation all the time. They are meant (as all rules are) to give a framework for the application of judgment.
_______________
Be careful with irony in e-mails.
If someone is carrying a heavy package, hold the door.
Avoid gossip.
Don’t text while driving.
Don’t pose for a photo with a drink in your hand.
Facebook should not be used for a therapy session.
Keep e-mails short.
Let passengers off the train first before you get on.
Don’t forward hoaxes.
Re-size pictures before putting them in e-mails.
If people follow you on Twitter, it's polite to "follow" them back.
Don’t give your business card to just anyone.
Never ask someone if they are pregnant.
Have nothing to do with standing ovations unless a performance is actually close to a once-in-a-lifetime experience.
Don’t hand out a postcard for your opening at someone else’s art opening.
Be on time.
Don’t walk into a gallery with your portfolio.
Replace your divots.
Don’t sabotage other’s efforts at creativity.
Be accountable for your actions.
Don’t send invitations to people who don’t know you.
Don’t be social in the bathroom.
Try to offer seats to those who you think need them.
What’s rude in life is rude on Twitter.
If you are in a store to use the free Wi-Fi, buy something.
Try to avoid interrupting conversations.
No matter how well trained your dog is, put your dog on a leash when near strangers.
Avoid profanity.
Don't spam.
Exit taxis on the sidewalk side only.
Always be kind to the wait staff, no matter what happens (and tip well).
Don’t buy purposely loud motor vehicles.
Don’t litter.
Don’t talk on your cell-phone in the checkout line.
The food at art openings is not a buffet.
__________________________
If you can think of any you want to add, please add them in the comment section.
Adolf Hitler and Adolf Ziegler visit the Degenerate Art exhibition, 1937.
Protesters outside the courthouse in 1990 protesting “Robert Mapplethorpe: The Perfect Moment” exhibit in Cincinnati.
People began to associate rules with authority and oppression of freedom.
Rules are now seen as antiquated obstacles to individualism and progress.
Artists in particular decided that following any rules meant total subordination of personal liberties to potentially dangerous social institutions. Artists now fear that if any rules are allowed to even be uttered without immediately being contradicted, that there will be a return to social domination like the infamous degenerate art exhibition of 1937 or Lenin’s Izo-Narkompros where totalitarian social institutions attempted to dictate the rules of art for everyone in society.
The notion that rules can function as efficient ways of passing knowledge that require judgment before following and not blind adherence seems to have withered as fear of totalitarianism has risen.
A total rejection of all rules is fueled by fear. Fear of loss of individuality, fear of loss of freedom, fear of loss of the notion of self, fear of loss of liberty, etc. Perhaps the fear is well founded, or perhaps there is nothing wrong with rules as long as the focus is on judgment, not adherence.
Rules are _not_ meant to be broken; they are meant to be guides that the informed can choose to follow or break depending on the situation, not just always broken.
Here are some rules that may evoke vehement objection or vigorous endorsement. Either way, they are not meant to apply to every situation all the time. They are meant (as all rules are) to give a framework for the application of judgment.
_______________
Be careful with irony in e-mails.
If someone is carrying a heavy package, hold the door.
Avoid gossip.
Don’t text while driving.
Don’t pose for a photo with a drink in your hand.
Facebook should not be used for a therapy session.
Keep e-mails short.
Let passengers off the train first before you get on.
Don’t forward hoaxes.
Re-size pictures before putting them in e-mails.
If people follow you on Twitter, it's polite to "follow" them back.
Don’t give your business card to just anyone.
Never ask someone if they are pregnant.
Have nothing to do with standing ovations unless a performance is actually close to a once-in-a-lifetime experience.
Don’t hand out a postcard for your opening at someone else’s art opening.
Be on time.
Don’t walk into a gallery with your portfolio.
Replace your divots.
Don’t sabotage other’s efforts at creativity.
Be accountable for your actions.
Don’t send invitations to people who don’t know you.
Don’t be social in the bathroom.
Try to offer seats to those who you think need them.
What’s rude in life is rude on Twitter.
If you are in a store to use the free Wi-Fi, buy something.
Try to avoid interrupting conversations.
No matter how well trained your dog is, put your dog on a leash when near strangers.
Avoid profanity.
Don't spam.
Exit taxis on the sidewalk side only.
Always be kind to the wait staff, no matter what happens (and tip well).
Don’t buy purposely loud motor vehicles.
Don’t litter.
Don’t talk on your cell-phone in the checkout line.
The food at art openings is not a buffet.
__________________________
If you can think of any you want to add, please add them in the comment section.
Adolf Hitler and Adolf Ziegler visit the Degenerate Art exhibition, 1937.
Protesters outside the courthouse in 1990 protesting “Robert Mapplethorpe: The Perfect Moment” exhibit in Cincinnati.
We were unable to find the audio file for this episode. You can try to visit the website of the podcast directly to see if the episode is still available. We check the availability of each episode periodically.
A Report from the Phantom Zone
0s · Published
Information has evolved into a new species of garbage.
The entire concept of someone who is “informed” has changed and now fragmentary 140 character lines of text pass as communication. It is not that this new breed of information is false that is the issue, but rather it is an illusion of knowledge.
We are all watching as knowledge is drowning in a river of irrelevance. There is constant stream of data flowing from one communication device to the other without picking up value along the way.
Sci-fi novels of the 20th century did not anticipate this 21st century state of reading. Bradbury and Orwell taught us to fear totalitarian governments that wanted to burn books, but no one warned us about the general public expressing their freedom to write so much that nothing would be worth reading.
This century’s dystopia novels will be populated by people who read and write all day long, but somehow they know nothing. People who are continually informed and yet have no information. The heroes of these novels will be underground rebels who insist on writing and reading more than 3 lines of text. They can have clever names like Edmund Spenser or Milton Vyasa and these new logos-heros will insist on things like news outlets that pay for and conduct thorough research. Inevitably the next generation of dystopia novels will conclude with death by communal distraction.
This new species of information is worse than being deprived of information because information has become a plague. The more you read, the less you know.
Tyranny is no longer required for the ruin of a society; the freedom to pursue an infinite appetite for distractions can do the job more efficiently. Included in this is the distraction of continual creativity without rationality or analysis.
A 14 year old girl is reported to have sent 35,463 text messages, or about 1 text message a minute in the month of June 2008. “The Old Man and the Sea” only has 27,315 words. The texter in question has stated she texted that much in one month because she was at cheer camp. It seems safe to say that while she wrote more than a Hemmingway novel in one month, the level of valuable information transmitted was probably significantly lower.
The antidote to the venom of cultural distraction is to return to state where reading is considered a serious business. Where the goal of information transfer is no longer quantity, but quality.
It is now November; ticket buying season for Miami Basel even in a down economy. All of the fairs can be followed on Facebook or Twitter:
Pulse on Twitter
Pulse on Facebook
Art Miami on Twitter
Art Miami on Facebook
Miami Basel on Twitter
Miami Basel on Facebook
Aqua on Facebook
Etc.
Etc.
I take these modes of communication seriously. Why would I follow Miami Basel’s Twitter account? Because I want to see if the fairs will be worth an investment in a trip this year. I expect the information they post to actually be valuable. I expect to see exhibitor lists. I expect to see performance art schedules.
But I am already wrong.
One of the fair’s tweets already says, “See you out there!”
It was not worth reading.
It was information evolved into garbage and I was its garbage collector.
I have faith in a return to the seriousness of reading, but I expect it will be a while.
-Steve
Me in Miami Basel 2006
Morgan Pozgar, age 13, is officially the LG National Texting Champion
P.S.Follow me on Twitter or Facebook
OMG LOL
The entire concept of someone who is “informed” has changed and now fragmentary 140 character lines of text pass as communication. It is not that this new breed of information is false that is the issue, but rather it is an illusion of knowledge.
We are all watching as knowledge is drowning in a river of irrelevance. There is constant stream of data flowing from one communication device to the other without picking up value along the way.
Sci-fi novels of the 20th century did not anticipate this 21st century state of reading. Bradbury and Orwell taught us to fear totalitarian governments that wanted to burn books, but no one warned us about the general public expressing their freedom to write so much that nothing would be worth reading.
This century’s dystopia novels will be populated by people who read and write all day long, but somehow they know nothing. People who are continually informed and yet have no information. The heroes of these novels will be underground rebels who insist on writing and reading more than 3 lines of text. They can have clever names like Edmund Spenser or Milton Vyasa and these new logos-heros will insist on things like news outlets that pay for and conduct thorough research. Inevitably the next generation of dystopia novels will conclude with death by communal distraction.
This new species of information is worse than being deprived of information because information has become a plague. The more you read, the less you know.
Tyranny is no longer required for the ruin of a society; the freedom to pursue an infinite appetite for distractions can do the job more efficiently. Included in this is the distraction of continual creativity without rationality or analysis.
A 14 year old girl is reported to have sent 35,463 text messages, or about 1 text message a minute in the month of June 2008. “The Old Man and the Sea” only has 27,315 words. The texter in question has stated she texted that much in one month because she was at cheer camp. It seems safe to say that while she wrote more than a Hemmingway novel in one month, the level of valuable information transmitted was probably significantly lower.
The antidote to the venom of cultural distraction is to return to state where reading is considered a serious business. Where the goal of information transfer is no longer quantity, but quality.
It is now November; ticket buying season for Miami Basel even in a down economy. All of the fairs can be followed on Facebook or Twitter:
Pulse on Twitter
Pulse on Facebook
Art Miami on Twitter
Art Miami on Facebook
Miami Basel on Twitter
Miami Basel on Facebook
Aqua on Facebook
Etc.
Etc.
I take these modes of communication seriously. Why would I follow Miami Basel’s Twitter account? Because I want to see if the fairs will be worth an investment in a trip this year. I expect the information they post to actually be valuable. I expect to see exhibitor lists. I expect to see performance art schedules.
But I am already wrong.
One of the fair’s tweets already says, “See you out there!”
It was not worth reading.
It was information evolved into garbage and I was its garbage collector.
I have faith in a return to the seriousness of reading, but I expect it will be a while.
-Steve
Me in Miami Basel 2006
Morgan Pozgar, age 13, is officially the LG National Texting Champion
P.S.Follow me on Twitter or Facebook
OMG LOL
We were unable to find the audio file for this episode. You can try to visit the website of the podcast directly to see if the episode is still available. We check the availability of each episode periodically.
SCAD-Atlanta Photo Exhibition
0s · PublishedWe were unable to find the audio file for this episode. You can try to visit the website of the podcast directly to see if the episode is still available. We check the availability of each episode periodically.
A Report from the Phantom Zone
0s · Published
This is a news report and criticism:
On Sept. 29, Boing Boing blogger Xeni wrote a criticism of this Ad by Ralph Lauren:
stating,"Dude, her head's bigger than her pelvis."
Ralph Lauren's law firm has now threatened to sue the ISP of the website for use of an "infringing image" and sent them a Digital Millennium Copyright Act takedown notice. Copyright law clearly outlines " fair use " as including work reproduced for "purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright."
So here is the simple question, does copyright law give people the right to threaten critics? Even if Xeni is ultimately proven protected under copyright law, BoingBoing, the ISP and Xeni all have to pay a lawyer in order to respond to the take down notice which has a very clear and formal procedure of notice and counter notice ( Chilling effects explains the procedure here ). Of course this is Ralph Lauren ultimate strategy because in the future, critics will be less likely to criticize their brand because the cost is not worth it.
In fact, if Big Red and Shiny or anyone else that reproduce my blog, runs the image, they may receive a take down notice and have to hire a lawyer to reply to it, ultimately not making this report worth running.
What about galleries, museums or artists that don't want negative reviews of their work? They can all send take down notices and effectively grind all criticism to a halt. In theory, as both a critical and news reporting publication, Big Red should be able to take any image from anywhere and reproduce it in any critical or news reporting article that is about the image. But in reality, Big Red has to be very careful because some images are simply not worth the required response to a take down notice.
Everything Ralph Lauren is doing is legal, just as it is perfectly legal for me to reproduce the image for reporting purposes on my blog and on Big Red. I say if every blogger joins with Xeni and BoingBoing and reports on this image, Ralph Lauren will be the one who can not afford to pay their lawyers to send out take down notices to everyone. As an added bonus, more people will see how terrible their ads, products and corporation are for our society.
So please, write a story about this image on your own blog. You can even take this whole article and reproduce it if you want with your own comments or criticism. I don't care, and trust me, I will not threaten to sue you for copyright infringement.
If you are a lawyer from Ralph Lauren, please send the take down notice to: [email protected]
Thanks and I look forward to the lawsuit,
Steve Aishman
On Sept. 29, Boing Boing blogger Xeni wrote a criticism of this Ad by Ralph Lauren:
stating,"Dude, her head's bigger than her pelvis."
Ralph Lauren's law firm has now threatened to sue the ISP of the website for use of an "infringing image" and sent them a Digital Millennium Copyright Act takedown notice. Copyright law clearly outlines " fair use " as including work reproduced for "purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright."
So here is the simple question, does copyright law give people the right to threaten critics? Even if Xeni is ultimately proven protected under copyright law, BoingBoing, the ISP and Xeni all have to pay a lawyer in order to respond to the take down notice which has a very clear and formal procedure of notice and counter notice ( Chilling effects explains the procedure here ). Of course this is Ralph Lauren ultimate strategy because in the future, critics will be less likely to criticize their brand because the cost is not worth it.
In fact, if Big Red and Shiny or anyone else that reproduce my blog, runs the image, they may receive a take down notice and have to hire a lawyer to reply to it, ultimately not making this report worth running.
What about galleries, museums or artists that don't want negative reviews of their work? They can all send take down notices and effectively grind all criticism to a halt. In theory, as both a critical and news reporting publication, Big Red should be able to take any image from anywhere and reproduce it in any critical or news reporting article that is about the image. But in reality, Big Red has to be very careful because some images are simply not worth the required response to a take down notice.
Everything Ralph Lauren is doing is legal, just as it is perfectly legal for me to reproduce the image for reporting purposes on my blog and on Big Red. I say if every blogger joins with Xeni and BoingBoing and reports on this image, Ralph Lauren will be the one who can not afford to pay their lawyers to send out take down notices to everyone. As an added bonus, more people will see how terrible their ads, products and corporation are for our society.
So please, write a story about this image on your own blog. You can even take this whole article and reproduce it if you want with your own comments or criticism. I don't care, and trust me, I will not threaten to sue you for copyright infringement.
If you are a lawyer from Ralph Lauren, please send the take down notice to: [email protected]
Thanks and I look forward to the lawsuit,
Steve Aishman
We were unable to find the audio file for this episode. You can try to visit the website of the podcast directly to see if the episode is still available. We check the availability of each episode periodically.
Steve Aishman Photography has 25 episodes in total of non- explicit content. Total playtime is 0:00. The language of the podcast is English. This podcast has been added on August 12th 2022. It might contain more episodes than the ones shown here. It was last updated on April 3rd, 2024 16:13.
Similar Podcasts
Every Podcast » Podcasts » Steve Aishman Photography