Documentary Production List

Three Fountains:

1.Point State Park 

2.Carnegie Museum of Art

3.Mary Schenley Memorial

1.

When: Thurs. 11/6 12-2pm

Shots:

-1 from every angle, capturing entire fountain

-many focusing on the spewing water

-many focusing on the water in the basin

-and its reflections of the world around it, myself

Audio:

-record sound of the rushing water

-the sound of the park around it

2.

When: Tues. 11/4 2-3pm, Wed. 11/5 or 11/12 8:30-9pm and "a rainy day"

Shots:

-take many shots from different angles-get every part of the sculpture

-lots of photos of the water itself and focusing on its reflections

-capture the weather's effect on the fountain

-and the viewer/environment around the fountain-and its effect on it

Audio:

-sound of the gushing water

3.

When: Tues. 11/4 3-4pm, Wed. 11/5 or 11/12 9-9:30pm 

Shots:

-many images of zoomed in water/the water flowing and in the basin

-show reflections-of myself and world around the fountain

-photos of the fountain in daylight and in the nightlight

Audio:

-sound of the water trickling

Documentary: 1st Draft

What is the significance of a fountain?  Do fountains merely serve as space fillers, or are they more meaningful?  And if so, why and how are they meaningful? 

            In today’s world, the definition of art is very broad, difficult to determine and inconsistent. People share different definitions of it and many disagree about what constitutes a work of art.  The viewer of a work may deem it of artistic caliber if it is aesthetically pleasing and if it evokes emotion, or involves deeper meaning.  A structure that fulfills both these requirements is the fountain.   Although to some, a fountain is just simply a piece of landscape decoration, truly it functions as something much more.  A fountain is a piece of artwork, because of its contents. 

            The main element of a fountain is water.  The placement and movement of the water in fountains may differ, yet the factor it brings is almost always the same.  Water has always had a calming and comforting affect of the human mind.  Moving water is even more appealing to the human senses.  The sound, look, touch and even smell of rippling, cascading, rushing, dripping water has a powerful affect on human beings. The sound of moving water is a popular and effective means of calming infants, many people own waterfalls or mini fountains in their homes, to add a sense of Zen-like tranquility to their spaces. Fountains enable their visitors to experience the delight and peace of flowing water. The appearance of water not only provides beauty, it produces reflection.  It is a known fact that water is a reflective substance, and the presence of reflection is powerful in of itself.  Fountains capture this characteristic of water seamlessly as they create reflections of the world around them and their visitors. 

            Fountains are ever changing, because the appearance of their contents, water, mirrors the world around it.  This reflecting ability of fountains makes them intriguing and appealing to look at. "...Happy in all that ragged, loose collapse of water, the fountain, its effortless descent and flatteries of spray... "
Richard Wilbur "A baroque wall fountain in the Villa Sciarra"  “Look within.  Within is the fountain of good, and it will ever bubble up, if thou wilt ever dig.”-Marcus Aurelius.  This quote describes this reflective ability of fountains on a deeper level.  The presence of reflection provokes a  visitor to look within themselves.  A fountain’s pool mirrors the image of its viewers and while doing so creates an atmosphere for inner reflection and meditation. 

            Fountains are meaningful pieces of art, for they provide reflection on two levels.  Primarily a fountain’s contents mirror the images present around them, yet through their peaceful and powerful element, they induce their viewers to reflect inwardly at the images present inside themselves.

IMAGES:

            -photos of fountains:

                        -Frick Fine Arts

                        -Cathedral?

                        -Carnegie Museum

                        -Point Park?

-sounds:

            -record rushing water

            -voiceover: myself reading my “script”

Peasant Shoes by Vincent van Gogh

The piece of artwork “Peasant Shoes”, painted by the famous Vincent van Gogh, depicts a pair of shoes that belong to a person of the lower class.  The state of the shoes suggests that this is a person who works very hard and has little money.  Yet, the manner in which the painting is created is also critical to its meaning.

Van Gogh has used short, messy brushstrokes to give the painting a feeling of movement and of life.  Van Gogh’s presence as the artist and creator of the piece is apparent each stroke of the brush can be seen, especially in the background.  The colors he uses are also very significant.  Van Gogh chooses rustic and earthy tones to render the image, therefore supporting the theme of peasantry and a rustic, simple lifestyle. 

Through the rendering of this image, Van Gogh creates a backdrop into a realistic life of a hardworking peasant.  The viewer receives a dynamic picture of every hardship and toil the wearer of the shoe has experienced.  The wear and tear of the boots is significant, because it corresponds to the wear and tear of the peasant. The viewer can be connected to the peasant through the object of his shoes, a valuable, personal piece of the person. 

The image Van Gogh has created is quite realistic; the shoes he has painted look very similar to actual, real boots in which a peasant would have worn.  Yet, this painting is more than simply a reproduction of the real thing.  Van Gogh has added his own feelings towards the poor community and the viewer adds their own interpretation to the piece as well. 

Diamond Dust Shoes by Andy Warhol

Andy Warhol’s “Diamond Dust Shoes” is produced in an intriguing way, a way which enables the viewer to understand the painting critically.  Andy Warhol uses a photograph of women’s shoes, then silk-screens them on to canvas, painting over with polymer paint, and lastly he covers the surface with “diamond dust”.  Warhol combines the everyday, cheap, commercial way of production, silk screening, with the fantastical, expensive, rare “diamond dust” coating.  Warhol blows a negative black and white image of women’s shoes, a tribute to his past, onto his canvas, then saturates his image with black and colored polymer and acrylic paint, through the silk screening process.  This method of engendering the image comes from Warhol’s days in advertising and his love for fashion. 

The silk screening process is one mainly used to transfer an image onto t-shirts and fabric.  It creates an image that is easily remade and very inexpensive to create, a prime example of mass-reproduction.  This is also a form of creation that separates the artist from their piece it transforms the artist into a manufacturer.  This is the type of relationship Warhol promoted in his works, he wished to be “a machine” and subtract his own human presence from the art.  Therefore, “Diamond Dust Shoes” expresses these two ideas of mass-reproduction and disassociation with the artist, through being a silk screen.  Yet, Warhol then adds his own glamorous touch to the piece, by dusting it with glass shavings, or “diamond dust”.  In a sense this transforms the piece into a self-portrait, a combination of commercialism and the manufactured with a glitzy, larger-than-life touch, a perfect image of Warhol himself.

Methodology/Interpretation:Barthes and Gander

                             

In Barthes’s piece, “From Work to Text”, he describes the definition of text in many ways.  One distinct way in which he describes text is by portraying text as a process of demonstration, a dynamic expression.  Barthes creates an image of text in which the meaning is found through the progress, rather than in the result.  This idea can also be linked to the work of the London-based, conceptual artist, Ryan Gander.  As an artist, Gander focuses on the thought and idea behind each of his pieces, and the process of making his art, rather than the end products he forms.  The meaning of the piece comes from each step and sequential action Gander takes in bringing to life his intended idea.  A very clear and strong example of this method can be found in Gander’s Alchemy Boxes.  These consist of wooden boxes, which Gander has constructed, and inside each are the placed the ingredients, or materials of a work of art.  Then beside the box is placed a plaque, which describes the contents pf each box.  These works of art emphasize the materials and steps of the process in which an artist takes part in to create a piece of work.  Gander has created toolkits for art, in which each box holds the complete and broken down experience of the creation of a piece of artwork. 

Gander’s Alchemy Boxes give voice to his emphasis on the demonstration over the display.  This is the same emphasis in which Barthes upholds.  It is the concept that the intention, idea and thoughts behind art are what give it is meaning and each stage in the formation of a piece is significant and valuable.

Andy Warhol Visit: Artwork #5

Andy Warhol's famous piece, The Last Supper 1984, is simply two large rectangular black and white photographs of Leonardo Da Vinci's The Last Supper, yet they have been saturated in a blood red color.  Warhol has reprodced a beloved and prestigious artwork, yet he has done so in a cheap manner, copying it in fuzzy black-white.  He has then defiled the piece even more by covering with a bloody red hue.  Warhol is making many statements with this piece.  He is outwardly defying the purity and sacredness of the Last Supper, by reproducing it cheaply and placing the copies side-by-side.  Warhol then makes a statement through the color of the piece.  During Holy Supper, a tradition in the Catholic faith, a believer drinks wine, yet the wine is believed to in fact be the blood of Jesus Christ.  Through painting his copies red, Warhol is dying The Last Supper in Jesus Christ's blood.  With this statement, Warhol spills his own beliefs about Catholicism and religion, and he encourages the viewer to form their own beliefs as well.

Andy Warhol Visit: Artwork #4

One of the largest and thought provoking pieces displayed at The Andy Warhol Museum, is Warhol's very well-known piece, Silver Clouds 1966.  This artwork consists of a room filled with large, silver helium-filled balloons, which float around the room, touching the viewer, enabling them to affect the artwork itself.  The piece is truly spectacular, because it provides not merely an incredible spectacle, but also a unique experience for the viewer to partake in.  The viewer experiences a carefree, epheremeral and dynamic sensation, one in which it is certain Warhol intended for.  The balloons are constantly changing, due to the presence of air flow in the room, therefore their positions are never the same, they are everchanging.  This is like the existence of actual clouds, which move, float, and change according to the wind.  Warhol mixes this realistic sense of clouds, with the fake, shiny, commerical material in which they are made of.  Therefore creating a truly unique piece of almost paradoxical art.

Andy Warhol Visit: Artwork #3

Andy Warhol's artwork, Self-Portrait 1986, is a typical Warhol creation, it is provocative, paradoxical and abstract.  Warhol presents his own image in this piece, yet he depicts it unrealistically.  The color fades in and out, therefore the viewer only gets fragments of Warhol's image, Warhol is playing with what he reveals and what he keeps hidden.  This theme is also reiterated in the pattern splayed across Warhol's face.  Camouflage is added to the picture, thus giving the viewer a sense that Warhol is attempting to blend in, to hide, to conceal.  Perhaps Warhol is trying to cloak his aging wrinkles, his sagging cheeks, or the assymetry of his face.  The viewer is not sure, yet the theme of keeping something hidden is very clear in this piece of artwork. 

Andy Warhol Visit: Artwork #2

Andy Warhol's very famous and almost comical piece, Brillo 1964, leaves the viewer with many questions.  This is so, because truly with this artwork Warhol is asking his own questions.  This piece consists of exact replica Brillo boxes stacked upon each other, an atypical example of art.  Warhol has taken an item from daily life, copied it a few times, stuck those copies together, put it in a musuem and called it art.  Therefore, Warhol prods the defintion of art, he twists and manipulates it, asking if a daily replicated item is considered art, then what isn't considered art?  He leaves his viewers contemplating the same question.  Warhol then asks a second question, what and who is an artist?  Warhol has taken himself, the artist, completely out of the piece of art itself.  There is no proof, no handprint, no mark of human contact of the piece.  Thus, Warhol has taken the human out of the art, he has become a machine.  Therefore, the observer of Brillo is left to wonder, is Andy Warhol truly an artist? Is a machine an artist? The piece will not answer those questions, instead it provokes its viewers to find the answers themselves.

Andy Warhol Visit: Artwork #1

Andy Warhol's silkscreen and polymer paint creation, Camouflage 1986, mixes abstract art with militaristic pattern.  Warhol has added his own infamous touch to the classic camouflage design.  He has accomplished this by injecting his palette with bright, neon hues, therefore twisting the sedated earthy tones of original camouflage.  In the chosen artwork, Warhol has picked vibrant blue colors, thus defying the point of the camouflage, making the ability of blending in on land entirely impossible.  This piece was accomplished not long before Warhol died, and perhaps the theme of camouflage ties into Warhol's passing.  Camouflage is the fashion of the Army, the fashion of war, and therefore the fashion of death.  Yet, Warhol brought his own personal touch to the creation by adding the fluorescent colors, a small yet distinct homage to his flamboyant nature.   Warhol has taken a pattern, originally designed for soldiers to blend into their surroundings, and he has reversed it, forming a design that stands out rather than blends in.  This describes Warhol flawlessly, as a creature that never blended in, and lived in vibrant color. 

Barthes's "From Work to Text" Summary

 

In Barthes's writing, "From Work to Text", he methodically compares the definition of work and text.  He describes seven ways in which they vary: method, genres, signs, plurality, filiation, reading and pleasure.  Barthes forms an image of text as something which is more meaningful in its process, rather than in its result.  Then in contrast, he describes work, whose true power comes from the product it creates.  Text is something elusive, its difficult to describe and to pinpoint.  One example Barthes uses to portray the significant difference between text and work, is by labelling work as the one being displayed, and text as the one being demonstrated.  Truly, Barthes challenges the fundamentals of language and writing in this piece.  He questions the links between reading and writing and the role in which the reader should and does play when reading or viewing a piece of work.

In Class Assignment #5/IP #1

The arguments found in Umberto Eco's Travels in Hyperreality about American art and society can be directly correlated to themes presented in Thomas Hirschhorn's Cavemanman.  The presence of "energy" and quantity over quality is an example of this reflected idea, found in both works.  Eco states in his work that many American museums have an abundance of authentic pieces, yet no distinct quality or underlying connection  with each other (27).  A second assertion Eco makes about American art is that there is an emphasis on easy access.  Eco uses Disneyland as an example of this ability for the public to gain access to anything (48). Hirschhorn presents this theme in his piece as well, with examples of accessibility in literature or knowledge and even sex, portrayed with the many pornographic posters lining the cave's walls.  Thirdly, both Hirschhorn and Eco's works argue that the stereotypical American viewpoint, that bigger is better, is neither stereotypical nor exaggerated.  It is instead a true belief found through American art.  Hirschhorn's displays this belief by creating vast rooms in his artwork, massive, over sized novels, all of which do not seem to fulfill a distinct purpose.  Cavemanman on a whole, is a larger-than-life piece of art, therefore presenting this theme flawlessly.  Eco addresses this idea with his example of the success of Disney World compared to the not quite as successful Disneyland.  The difference in success rate between these two parks is not merely about their locations, but about their sizes.  Eco argues that Disney World is massive compared to Disneyland, therefore in the American mindset, it is greater (26).  Truly the opinions of Eco and Hirschhorn are debatable, and do not speak for every American or critic of American art.  Yet, their assertions and arguments about what defines American art, compel the reader and viewer to look within themselves and become thinkers, critiques and doers rather than simply bystanders.  

Eco, Umberto. Travels in Hyperreality: Essays. Orlando, FL:Harcourt Brace & Company, 1986. 26-48.