students!
a great opportunity to gain insight into writing about art from a professional!
if you're interested in RSVPing, email chicagoartistwriters@gmail.com
enjoy baudrillard and wall!
best, jason
Wednesday, October 31, 2012
writing workshop for artists // nov 7th at 6pm
students!
a great opportunity to gain insight into writing about art from a professional!
if you're interested in RSVPing, email chicagoartistwriters@gmail.com
enjoy baudrillard and wall!
best, jason
Tuesday, October 30, 2012
guidelines for Final - Theoretical Essay
Final Project – Theoretical Essay
Students
will write a 4-5 page theoretical essay where they introduce a new paradigmatic
idea on photography (defined loosely, derivations from this are ok upon
instructor approval).
It
is encouraged for students to develop their own theoretical term(s) in their
paper that are contributions to the ongoing discourse on photography. Papers will be well-researched,
high-level arguments/observations that are supported by evidence and images (students to create an
appendix that contains footnotes and images, all papers must have a minimum of
4-5 pages of text regardless of their use of images).
Papers
are due the last day of class.
Papers
must have a clear thesis.
If
used, original vocabulary terms must be clearly defined.
References
must be cited on the bottom of each page according to current MLA standards.
Students
must visit and utilize the SAIC library; the internet is not a ceiling for
research…consult the librarian on relevant materials to consult.
For our final class,
students will present via, PowerPoint, the main arguments and examples of their
essays in a 10-12 minute timed
lecture. This presentation should
be practiced, clear, concise, and
dynamic.
Theoretical Essay Proposal
On Nov 7th, bring
a printed essay proposal of two pages to class for review by peers and the
instructor. Add any images necessary
to your proposal as additional printouts behind your proposal—staple everything
together. In addition, please post
the same text and images on the class blog by the beginning of class.
Punctum
This image is by Shane Lavalette. The room these two folks are sitting in looks a lot like Putnam Pantry an ice-cream shop I used to go after school with my carpool. Its the room but mostly its the way the light is coming into the room. I can really clearly place myself there will ice-cream in hand. Everything I look at this image I think about those after school trips.
Wednesday, October 24, 2012
Punctum -Tyler
This was an image that I created. When I created this image I did not have a conscious reason for taking the image in the way that i did. When i now look at this image i have a flashback of my childhood. I have an experience of smell and a visual experience, of my early family vacations in southern Georgia. The wrought iron, and the palm trees bring me back to the smell of sulfur which fills the air from the paper mills in the south.
Punctum
Up until 2 years ago there was no punctum for me in this image. After experiencing Chicago's loop during my school week a punctum began to reify. Other than the conceptual hints this image gives me, it gives me a general feeling me walking home from school. It feels like everything is coming together after a long day at school, The stars are aligning for me and I finally get some time to take care of things. I get that feeling from the intersecting lines and the etherial back lighting.
Tuesday, October 23, 2012
silent debate
# Obama has a forward head posture. It is a contemporary medical condition of having your neck tilted forward so that you head does not sit right on your spine but a bit forward. It comes from looking at laptops and iPads. Most of us have that condition, so I didn’t notice that while looking at Obama, but rather while looking at Romney with good posture.
# Obama’s hand gesture is enclosing. He seems to be explaining his idea by creating groups of ideas. Whereas Romney seems to be leveling his ideas. Romney’s hand gesture is more linear and horizontal. This is interesting compared to how we artists talk. I’ve noticed in artists talks that artists would often have vertical hand gestures as if they were grasping an idea that is floating above. We often look upwards to bring words to our mouth.
# This lead me to think that politicians and artists are at the opposite end of our social food chain. Politicians are generally from wealthy families, trying to win votes from the lower class. Artists are generally from working class families, and we make money from the rich people. This is not entirely true, but that is the general conception.
# So at least in theory, politicians and artists are mutations of the classical sense of food chain. We both deny the common sense of the strong eating the weak.
# Obama’s hand gesture is enclosing. He seems to be explaining his idea by creating groups of ideas. Whereas Romney seems to be leveling his ideas. Romney’s hand gesture is more linear and horizontal. This is interesting compared to how we artists talk. I’ve noticed in artists talks that artists would often have vertical hand gestures as if they were grasping an idea that is floating above. We often look upwards to bring words to our mouth.
# This lead me to think that politicians and artists are at the opposite end of our social food chain. Politicians are generally from wealthy families, trying to win votes from the lower class. Artists are generally from working class families, and we make money from the rich people. This is not entirely true, but that is the general conception.
# So at least in theory, politicians and artists are mutations of the classical sense of food chain. We both deny the common sense of the strong eating the weak.
punctum
I see million different faces in there.
Facebook Panopticon
There was a website called Cyworld. It is very similar to Facebook, and it was extremely popular in Korea before Facebook took over the social network market. I would argue that Cyworld was more popular than Facebook, at least in Korea. South Korea is a very populated country, and about half its population (which would be 20 million people) live in Seoul or its suburbs. So high speed internet and wireless internet is very common. Everyone was on Cyworld, and I really mean everyone.
The first incident (that I remember of) related to the idea of Panopticon was in 2005. A young woman got into an argument with an older lady for not cleaning after her pet dog. The right and wrong of this incidence was clear. Dogs were not allowed on trains, and a dog owner should always carry a doggy bad to clean after her dog. Someone in that train recorded the argument on his cellphone and posted the video clip on Cyworld. Millions saw that video, and of those millions there were people who could identify the young woman. They found her Cyworld page, and its link was posted on different websites, and thousands of people visited the young woman’s page, leaving terrible messages on her wall. Her identity was soon posted: her name, age, the school she went to, and even where she lived. All for not cleaning up after her dog, and arguing with an elderly about it.
What she did in the train was wrong, especially in Korean culture, to yell at an elder. However, she probably had to recreate her identity, move to a different city if not a different country. I don’t think she deserved that.
These happenings of thousands of internet users attacking a single person became more and more frequent. At its peak, there were incidents like that every other week or so, and I am not the most wired person. Each of those incidents had its reason: someone did something wrong. But it was clearly getting out of control, to the degree that I didn’t feel safe. What if I had a bad day, and did something mean to someone? There was a possibility that it would be recorded and posted online. I could say something offensive to someone, and that phrase could be online, without the context in which it was spoken. It is easy to be politically wrong, if you record only a segment of a speech.
When Foucault talks about the Panopticon, one of the important aspects of it is that it is an economic way to control the people. Now, how is this Cyworld panopticon a way to control the people? I would propose that it is a form of horizontal violence.
Horizontal violence is when members of a lower social class turn their aggression towards another subgroup in the same class, rather than the ruling class. It is a term first used by Frantz Fanon who used it to explain colonial exploitation.
I have noticed that Cyworld panopticon is unreasonably violent, and its victims are almost always young women. I would argue that such aggression is a form of horizontal violence where young males from lower middle class Korean society, turn their aggression towards women. It makes sense in the time and culture of early 21st century Korea.
Women are competing with men in the job market at a more equal status, and the economy is not blossoming as we expected it to during the 90s. It makes sense to deduce that young men who spent ten or more years in education, entered the job market and felt disappointed. Add a little bit of psychoanalytic to the sociological phenomenon, and we have a textbook case of collective Vagina Dentata.
I am interested in this because this is a timeless phenomenon. It happened in politics historically: politicians have been known to create public enemies or even create war in order to diverge hostility. However, it is becoming harder with the social media to create a targeted enemy amongst people. Yet the social media were able to conform to the ruling class need and lock the people in their own panopticon. It revealed to be in a form of Cyworld panopticon I talked about, but with the changing media, I am curious as to who and how will this manifest in the future.
The first incident (that I remember of) related to the idea of Panopticon was in 2005. A young woman got into an argument with an older lady for not cleaning after her pet dog. The right and wrong of this incidence was clear. Dogs were not allowed on trains, and a dog owner should always carry a doggy bad to clean after her dog. Someone in that train recorded the argument on his cellphone and posted the video clip on Cyworld. Millions saw that video, and of those millions there were people who could identify the young woman. They found her Cyworld page, and its link was posted on different websites, and thousands of people visited the young woman’s page, leaving terrible messages on her wall. Her identity was soon posted: her name, age, the school she went to, and even where she lived. All for not cleaning up after her dog, and arguing with an elderly about it.
What she did in the train was wrong, especially in Korean culture, to yell at an elder. However, she probably had to recreate her identity, move to a different city if not a different country. I don’t think she deserved that.
These happenings of thousands of internet users attacking a single person became more and more frequent. At its peak, there were incidents like that every other week or so, and I am not the most wired person. Each of those incidents had its reason: someone did something wrong. But it was clearly getting out of control, to the degree that I didn’t feel safe. What if I had a bad day, and did something mean to someone? There was a possibility that it would be recorded and posted online. I could say something offensive to someone, and that phrase could be online, without the context in which it was spoken. It is easy to be politically wrong, if you record only a segment of a speech.
When Foucault talks about the Panopticon, one of the important aspects of it is that it is an economic way to control the people. Now, how is this Cyworld panopticon a way to control the people? I would propose that it is a form of horizontal violence.
Horizontal violence is when members of a lower social class turn their aggression towards another subgroup in the same class, rather than the ruling class. It is a term first used by Frantz Fanon who used it to explain colonial exploitation.
I have noticed that Cyworld panopticon is unreasonably violent, and its victims are almost always young women. I would argue that such aggression is a form of horizontal violence where young males from lower middle class Korean society, turn their aggression towards women. It makes sense in the time and culture of early 21st century Korea.
Women are competing with men in the job market at a more equal status, and the economy is not blossoming as we expected it to during the 90s. It makes sense to deduce that young men who spent ten or more years in education, entered the job market and felt disappointed. Add a little bit of psychoanalytic to the sociological phenomenon, and we have a textbook case of collective Vagina Dentata.
I am interested in this because this is a timeless phenomenon. It happened in politics historically: politicians have been known to create public enemies or even create war in order to diverge hostility. However, it is becoming harder with the social media to create a targeted enemy amongst people. Yet the social media were able to conform to the ruling class need and lock the people in their own panopticon. It revealed to be in a form of Cyworld panopticon I talked about, but with the changing media, I am curious as to who and how will this manifest in the future.
next week
i'll be posting a hodge podge of four articles as a sort of break from the normal reading that we'll discuss a week from tomorrow (2nd half of camera lucida and la jete screening), look for them on the portal.
best, j
Punctum
I came across Christian Patterson's work this summer, and it took me a little while to really see what I believe is the punctum in this photograph. After observing it closely, I finally realized the words at the very top. I was so intrigued, I had to look up what this verse said:
But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.
-Revelation 21:8
I found this subtle clue to look farther beyond the image truly intriguing. I love that I was so captured by this, that I felt like I needed to do research to discover a completely new view of this photo.
Punctum
Tuesday, October 16, 2012
(Published August 2002)
"Jackass" co-star Steve-O will find out Friday whether he'll be shipped off to Louisiana to face obscenity charges for allegedly stapling his scrotum to his inner thigh during a nightclub act there.
The 28-year-old stunt-monger, whose real name is Stephen Glover, was arrested Monday in Los Angeles on a fugitive from justice warrant and is being held on $150,000 bail. His extradition hearing in Los Angeles Municipal Court is scheduled for Friday morning.
In addition to the obscenity charges, Glover — who is known for such stunts as getting his butt cheeks pierced together and snorting live earthworms, which he pulls out through his mouth — is also accused of being a principal to second-degree battery for a separate stunt that night in which a bouncer allegedly threw a 19-year-old on his head and knocked him unconscious.
The club act, caught on tape by an audience member, took place July 11 at the Abyss in Houma on the Louisiana coast south of New Orleans. Abyss owner George Bourg and club manager Lenny Swiderski were arrested Wednesday as principals to obscenity and second-degree battery. Bond was set at $150,000 each.
Terrebonne Parish, Louisiana, Assistant District Attorney Carlos Lazarus said that if Glover doesn't contest extradition, the local sheriff's office would send deputies to pick him up in Los Angeles as early as next week. If Glover does contest, Terrebonne Parish authorities will have 30 days to get a governor's warrant while he remains in custody in Los Angeles. If Glover posts bail, he's free to return to Louisiana to face charges.
If convicted, he faces up to eight years in prison, three of which would be for the obscenity charge.
Tuesday, October 9, 2012
next reading BARTHES, buy that book if you haven't!
Wk 7 – 10/10
Discuss:
1979 Jean-Francois Lyotard, “The Postmodern
Condition” (19 pages)
Read:
1980 Roland Barthes, “Camera Lucida” first
half (60 pages)
Wk 8 – 10/17
Discuss:
1980 Roland Barthes, “Camera Lucida” first
half (60 pages)
Read:
1980 Roland Barthes, “Camera Lucida” second
half (59 pages)
Presidential Debates on Silent
I saw distinct, repetitive hand gestures, passive glances, aggressive breaths, and clear acknowledgement of the camera. I experienced a strong sensation of stage presence, humor, and a twinge of disgust. I saw no panic in the eyes of either candidate. I saw flashes of impatience crawl across each candidate's face whilst the other spoke. I could almost feel their breath as they raced to spit out their scripts, in forceful tones, in paced tones, in trained tones.
Romney's hand gestures made me think of an aggressive cooking show. He had continuous chopping motions, number pointing, pile separations, pinching, and scattering. He looked like he was out to inform. Obama's hand movements reminded me of passive, late night infomercial. He often placed his hands in such a way that suggested an invisible product, and he talked directly into the camera more often than not. He looked like he was clearly selling a product.
They had distinct styles of ending their monologues--Obama would glance down at his podium, Romney choked out a flat smile. The tone of their expressions were much too contrasting--Romney combative, Obama passive. Both had a presence that was clearly dramatic, clearly rehearsed, clearly in disagreement. They also seemed to blink way too much.
I wonder if there were parts that were spontaneous, improvised, thought of on the spot. I wonder if they actually listened to each other. Or were they just waiting for their queue to speak and to gesture. I wonder how they speak to each other behind closed doors, with no cameras, no lights, no script, no audience. I wonder.
Romney's hand gestures made me think of an aggressive cooking show. He had continuous chopping motions, number pointing, pile separations, pinching, and scattering. He looked like he was out to inform. Obama's hand movements reminded me of passive, late night infomercial. He often placed his hands in such a way that suggested an invisible product, and he talked directly into the camera more often than not. He looked like he was clearly selling a product.
They had distinct styles of ending their monologues--Obama would glance down at his podium, Romney choked out a flat smile. The tone of their expressions were much too contrasting--Romney combative, Obama passive. Both had a presence that was clearly dramatic, clearly rehearsed, clearly in disagreement. They also seemed to blink way too much.
I wonder if there were parts that were spontaneous, improvised, thought of on the spot. I wonder if they actually listened to each other. Or were they just waiting for their queue to speak and to gesture. I wonder how they speak to each other behind closed doors, with no cameras, no lights, no script, no audience. I wonder.
tino seghal for discussion wednesday
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/01/arts/design/01tino.html?pagewanted=all
specifically his piece "This Progress"
specifically his piece "This Progress"
Debate response
The lack of sound brings forth the decisions that Obama and Romney (along with their campaign teams) make when addressing the questions within their debate. Regardless of what the moderator or competitor asks, each candidate responded in a prepared physical manner. Neither of the candidates seems surprised or unsure, but rather confident and eager to respond.
The greatest choice that watching only visuals presents is who the candidates choose to speak to when speaking. Romney generally speaks to Jim or looks directly at Obama. Obama, however, continuously stares into the camera, thus speaking to the viewers at home, and the viewers in the audience, if there is a video projection there. This makes it seem as though Romney is attempting to have a conversation with the President, while Obama is trying to reassure the people who sided with him four years ago.
In addition, the candidates differ when judging the amount of movement they express. While Obama is composed and relaxed, Romney has a sense of controlled enthusiasm. He reacts more openly when he believed Obama was incorrect, and Obama uses hand gestures, but combines them with a stoic stance.
Silent Debate
I hate the way they move, the way they freeze after they say something and dramatically move their hands as if there words are small diamonds falling on a nation of eager listeners.
Romney looks angry. He should be. His suit makes he look like a rectangle.
Obama looks relaxed. too relaxed. hes trying to be the president of the united states.
I wonder what makes that guys heard race.
His face stays open. eyebrows up. Do they choreograph that stuff too?
Romneys face looks like white privilege. His hands are in fists like hes angrily pounding the table making demands.
Romney looks at Obama
Obama looks at the audience.
Obama keeps making this invisible orb circle with his hands. Im sure hes talking about the middle class.
I feel like I want to do a voice over like Wizzard People Dear Readers.
(if you didnt catch that reference click here... if you did click here)
It feels way to grand. I keep thinking about what Marshall Mcluhan suggested and was immediatly laughed at.
What if what we watched was Obama and Romney sitting down over a beer just taking passionately about what they believe America needs. It will never happen though. Too much of a risk.
Romney is focusing all this attention on Obama... staring him down. Obama looks so passive in comparison.
It all feels really rehearsed.
They look like puppets. I mean I guess they are.
Romney looks angry. He should be. His suit makes he look like a rectangle.
Obama looks relaxed. too relaxed. hes trying to be the president of the united states.
I wonder what makes that guys heard race.
His face stays open. eyebrows up. Do they choreograph that stuff too?
Romneys face looks like white privilege. His hands are in fists like hes angrily pounding the table making demands.
Romney looks at Obama
Obama looks at the audience.
Obama keeps making this invisible orb circle with his hands. Im sure hes talking about the middle class.
I feel like I want to do a voice over like Wizzard People Dear Readers.
(if you didnt catch that reference click here... if you did click here)
It feels way to grand. I keep thinking about what Marshall Mcluhan suggested and was immediatly laughed at.
What if what we watched was Obama and Romney sitting down over a beer just taking passionately about what they believe America needs. It will never happen though. Too much of a risk.
Romney is focusing all this attention on Obama... staring him down. Obama looks so passive in comparison.
It all feels really rehearsed.
They look like puppets. I mean I guess they are.
"On Photography" response
"Shooting a lighthouse from a boat"
This series of images shows a situation in which I lacked a sense of control, but chose to shoot regardless. The act of presenting such an instance to others points to the notion that no matter what one does to control a situation, there will always be chance involved because of the environment and technology photographers work with. This set plants the photographer in a specific location, which has affected the outcome of the images.
On Photography Photograph
Presidential debate assignment
Watching Obama and Romey debate for 10 minutes without audio really makes me notice things I didn't notice before. One of the most prominent things that I noticed is how their hands kept me intrigued somehow. It was almost like the same method used to keep a.d.d. people to concentrate in visual media Ie. in excessive scene cuts in movies and television. I find this very interesting because from the amount of energy put out in their hand gestures I kind of get the feeling like they have a hand gesture instructor. When Obama or Romney have something really definitive to say they will stare into the camera and have more defined and blunt hand movements to possibly match the levels of earnestness in what they are saying.
Romney seems to shake his head more than Obama does. I get a feeling like he is refuting a claim that Obama made. They both understand the television medium enough to know that appearance and stature is just as important as what they have to say. This assignment reminds me of when Marshall McLuhan critiqued the first televised presidential debate (Nixon-Kennedy). His main points were how the party that could understand the television medium the best would essentially win. What he meant was who ever looked the best could win over people. It’s kind of sad, in the way that is all it takes. On the radio it sounded like Nixon won, because of his sterner voice, but on television it looked like Kennedy won because he seemed to look better, he had taken a couple precautions. He had a make up artist, Nixon didn’t. This effected Nixon’s credibility because he was sweating profusely which made him seem nervous, where on the other hand Kennedy had make up on which helped out in that area. Kennedy also critiqued his outfit by figuring out what his background was going to be so he could stand out on color tv and more importantly black and white, because at the time that is what most people had. Nixon wore a grey suite which in that specific case made him blend in with the scene, Whereas Kennedy stood out.
The way a presidential candidates present themselves is extremely important, especially when they are defending themselves. I say that because it’s easier to gage someones vibe when they are dealing with a problem. The way in which they deal with that problem is a key signifier on how they will solve more to come. It is also important because we all have problems and watching someone solve a problem is really relatable and therefore its easier to judge their character by it.
Sontag-Photograph commentary
Presidential Debate
The
first thing I noticed about the Presidential Debate was the posture of the two
candidates. Governor Romney seemed extremely tense, and stood very straight,
while President Obama seemed more casual, putting all of his weight on one
foot, and seemed fairly relaxed. Romney’s piercing eyes were dead set on making
eye contact with the camera, or directly at the President. While Obama spends a
great deal of time making notes and observing whatever he holds on the podium,
Romney surprisingly appears as if he has nothing to observe.
Their
posture really spoke to me the whole time, particularly while they are on mute.
I feel that Romney intentionally stands an a more postured manner to appear as
his Republican party would expect him to; as a strong conservative leader that
is going to be a good leader for his fellow citizens. Obama’s lenient stance
seems to be more of a shared one among “the people”. Throughout this campaign,
the candidates seem more concerned with badgering each other until the last man
standing wins. Their stance alone speaks mountains to me about how this
election has turned out to appear. The constitution behind the candidates seems
to promote the original ideas of simplicity and freedom for the fellow man. I
believe if I crawled out from under a rock and saw this footage on mute, it
would appear as if two men are standing for what they believe is best, and
simply discussing the problems and solutions. Fortunately, that’s exactly what
they are doing, but it makes me question the true intentions of the opponents.
Knowing the background of this election, I can’t help but wonder if the intent
is truly what is better for the country, or which person can get more votes.
Viewing
this debate in silence means almost as much as it does with words to me, for I
truly pay attention to the actions of the candidates as equally as the words.
Documenting these moments proves true to the questioning of photography as
reality. I jump to the thought of
‘actions speaking louder than words’, as well as ‘a picture is worth thousand
words.’ As far as politics go, it
seems you can tell a great deal more from the way a person moves and acts as
opposed to what they say. This debate expresses a great deal of how the country
sees and understands these two men, at least how they are portrayed on the
television screen.
Monday, October 8, 2012
Thursday, October 4, 2012
Presidential Debates
I started watching without sound at
11:00 min, after watching it through all the way with sound. It was kind
of distracting without sound...especially after listening to it with sound, I
just kept focusing on what I had heard and trying to figure out what part they
were at, so I wish I wouldn’t have done that.
On that note, Romney’s hand gestures were way more aggressive. His hands shot into the air with purpose in
some places and then quickly went slipped into awkward positions with holding
hands in the same place like he was forcing himself to have movements at some
points, really quite comical. His facial
expressions were really attacking I thought to.
He usually directed his attention to the President and was very clear
with his facial expressions.
The President’s hands seemed softer and
his body gestures were less aggressive.
His suit blended a little too much for me with the blue suit, blue tie,
but it did really go with his demeanor.
Were as Romney had a red face and red tie and was really convincing with
his face, body, most of the time. A
little distracting was the President’s arm length and fit of his suit, with the
cropping of the video, waist up, he looked really bunchy and on top of his
light gestures it really made him look childlike almost, which definitely
wasn’t read with the sound on. Romney’s
suit also didn’t fit well; he was a lot boxer too. That seemed to go with the
overall appearance he was trying to convey.
Altogether I find the hand gestures
completely irritating and so fake, especially when the sounds off. I would love to just sick sound bites over
top of the video and create something really great. That would be quite entertaining and really
fitting. I mean, to ‘stage’ hand
motions, clearly they both were, to me is just insulting. Yes, if your not really listening I think you
can interpret body language and appearance and have it be quite impressionable,
but if I a 23 year old, can understand and appreciate a debate without the
shitty antics of poor gestures and bad timing, I think everyone else can do
without theatrics and watch the debate for what it is, a debate.
Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Debate/make a photo HW
1. Watch the debates somehow
10 minutes without sound, and then write 4 paragraphs about your experience.
2. Make one photograph, that is a response to "ON PHOTOGRAPHY".
an image that is some sort of infiltration of the text.
Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)