I do not remember if we went over him too intensively in class, but I have heard of Vik Muniz outside of class or well before this class. He creates these beautiful pieces of art from essentially a "pun on words". His most famous piece Clown Skull is a human skull which he put a clown nose on. I really did not like this piece, but it most know pieces. His piece that is my favorite is Sugar Children, which was photography exhibition in the MoMa in 1993.

Eyes Closed,

As I sit here I here the footsteps from above. This noise is not a peaceful noise, it is aggravated and annoying. It makes me feel distressed and uncomfortable knowing that there is someone living above me and I can hear all of their movements.
My roommate speak in a beautiful foreign language, russian. She just speaks it so fluently and freely, it makes me warm inside.
Lolas feet tapping to the beat of Matt and Kim.
Doors shutting around me.
Last but not least, the humm/buzz coming from the dying light bulb.

Once I open my eyes, I realize what I miss without sight. If I did not know Lola was sitting there I would not know who's feet were tapping, or who was playing Matt and Kim. I feel like people do know appreciate sight as much as they should, it is such a beautiful thing.

First Memory,

My first memory was my house in Woodstock. The freedom of the lake, the vastness of the yard, the peacefulness of the house. It was just so beautiful. I wish all of my memories still were as warm and "fuzzy" as this one. But they are not, and that is where a lot of the distress comes from in my art work. A lot of anger and despair. Even though my first memory was a beautiful, warm, memory a lot of my childhood memories and pre-teen memories are not.
I think those memories have more of an impact on my art than my first memory. My first memory usually comes through at the end of a series. The light at the end of the tunnel kind of thing.

The Yes Men,

I thought this was a very interesting movie. Seeing it again, really allowed me to catch other details I had missed before. I think what they are doing is really amazing, but it will get old fast. The last part of the movie is my favorite part, the reaction to the newspaper always gets to me. It just so so peaceful that people would actually want this change. Government today is always talking about the people are not willing to accept change and go forth with it. But this really showed the viewers that they were, they are for change and think it is a brilliant idea to do it. Especially, the war in Iraq, I feel that topic had the biggest response. That is something that will never be forgotten, because it is a war that did not need to be fought.
Another part that still gets be is the explosion in India and how the plant still has not been cleaned up. If this was America, it would have been cleaned up within the that week. Well not really, but you get the point. Since it is not America, India does not matter, it is just a third world country right? Gosh, this just drives me insane! India still has families that are still being harmed by these chemicals. Children are being born with illness' and missing limbs.
Seriously, when will America learn, or for that the whole world. We are just driving ourselves into a ditch.

Helvetica.

I really enjoyed this move, even though I have already seen it about three to four times prior. Each time I watch Helvetica I catch little parts of the movie I missed before. The first time I saw Helvetica was about a year, maybe a year-and-a-half ago, and I was so astonished by how commonly used the font is. My questioning to it, was would anyone use a font so common? Wouldn't they what their business to have a font/logo to stick out from all the rest? I just find it really puzzling in that matter. But after seeing the movie, I am more aware of the different fonts and characters used in logos. I think logos really make the business, a logo that really sticks out to me are ones done in a handwritten type style. Some thing that is clean cut and very elegant. But, I still think we need Helvetica, a straight forward uniform font. 

Decasia - The State of Decay

I am completely in love with Decasia by Bill Morrision. The movie has great movement and flow. I feel Morrison is breaking new ground with using ruined film. I have never heard of someone using old decaying film reels to create films, only people printing old ruined photography film. I had the chance to meet Morrison on Thursday, September 30th, and upon that visit he informed me that when he was making Decasia all of the music was made before the movie was even made. Morrision chose all the scenes in Decasia to fit perfectly to the composed music. Once I found that aspect out, I was more than impressed. Bill Morrison really created a successful film, and I cannot wait to he releases more films like this.

The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction The Art History Archive - Modern Art 1-7 to 11-13

Art is now limited. Yes, now we can create art with every material our minds can imagine. Basically if the artist can imagine it, the artist can now create it. But art is stuck between the art work and what is recognized as art.
Walter Benjamin states that each piece of art has an "'aura'".  It "withers in the age of mechanical reproduction is the aura of the work of art." Originally art was replicated solely as a practice. Until I read this article I never thought of stamping and lithography as a form of replication. But Benjamin put that idea into my head and it really did make sense. Even photographs and film are replicas of other pieces of art. Pictures of art and videos of art. Art is not just on paper, it also involves architecture and layouts of cities. Everything is art in one way or another. 
Each original piece of artwork, means that one thing from the time and place it was created. 
Tradition is another topic in this article. Tradition varies from culture to culture, place to place, and person to person. In the article Benjamin stated that it changes throughout history or it is "extremely changeable." I completely agree with Benjamin's statement that it is extremely changeable. Just thinking back to the way people would dress. Women had to basically be covered from head to toe, and now-a-days if anyone is covered from head to toe, they are almost considered an outsider. 
"Mechanical reproduction of art changes the reaction of the masses toward art." Art is a visual and emotional enjoyment. It is made from a connection and a reaction from the viewer. Benjamin explains that in his piece "the greater the decrease in the social significance of an art form, the sharper the distinction between criticism and enjoyment by the public." He was making a significant effort to make a point to there will always be a connection between the enjoyment and the criticism in the piece. I do not agree that a mechanical reproduction of an image is an actual piece of art, the new artist is just stealing what the past artist created. 
In general, this article was very interesting and had some many key points. But it was hard for me to draw solid conclusions to what Benjamin was saying, he was confusing at some points. Some of my connections to his points were kind of interpretations to what he was saying and not oh yes I completely understand what he was saying.


Article: 
http://www.lilithgallery.com/arthistory/modern/The-Work-of-Art-in-the-Age-of-Mechanical-Reproduction.html

Facebook in the real world – amazing case study

This is a really interesting article, but I do not agree with the ways Facebook is integrating itself into society. Eventually everyone is just going to be so depended on text and online activities, no one is going to know how to communicate in person anymore. There is no need to constantly update where the user has been and what they "like". If someone wants to know they can just do the "old fashion way" of just asking them. If Facebook creates this new bracelet thing, people are going to be even more attached (literally) to Facebook than ever. 
Facebook is a way to keep in contact with friends that live far away, or back at home when you are away at college. It does not need to be a map of the persons everyday life. 


Article: 
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129298003

Tracking The Companies That Track You Online

I completely disagree with this. Companies should not have the right to track us on the internet. That is our personal business. That is like oh okay I'll just follow your all around town knowing where you are going and who you are hanging out with. How fast your are driving and how long you are hanging out with Jane Doe today.
The internet companies or other corporations should not have access to track peoples activities online. Especially knowing the age and name of the person being traced. It is a breach of peace and privacy. No information should be tracked then sold to the advertisement companies.  They need to find another way to find data on users. 


Article: 
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129298003

The Web Is A 'Shrinking Minority' Of Internet Traffic

This past month Linda Wertheimer and Steven Inskeep interviewed Mr. Chris Anderson; Editor-in-chief of Wired magazine, about the up-and-coming issue of "Wired Magazine". In this issue the highly anticipated article The Web is Dead will be released. 

Inskeep and Wertheimer question Anderson about the article in a very open manor. Come to find out the title is a huge over statement to what the article is truly about. Anderson was referencing the World Wide Web and not the whole Internet. This is also giving readers a little   bit more understanding on the common misconception of when people refer to the Internet as the web. Where truly the web is the World Wide Web and the Internet is a more mature form of that. Anderson states later in the article "the Web is the adolescent phase of the Internet. And it's dead in the sense that the child is dead when they become an adult." 

But back to the real point to the article, the World Wide Web is dead. 

Steven Inskeep starts the interview out with an open statement of "We've spoken for years as though the Internet and the World Wide Web are pretty much the same thing - that they're synonyms. But you begin by pointing out that they're not." I disagree with his statement of that the Internet and the World Wide Web are synonyms; even at a young age I knew the World Wide Web was just a stepping stool to what was in store for the future. The World Wide Web is officially defined as a "Computing a vast network of linked hypertext files, stored on computers throughout the world, that can provide a computer user with information on a huge variety of subjects." (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/World+Wide+Web) Where as the Internet actually involves the World Wide Web "the single worldwide computer network that interconnects other computer networks, on which end-user services, such as World Wide Web sites or data archives, are located, enabling data and other information to be exchanged." (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Internet) To this point, Anderson's answer to the statement was that the Web was just an application to the Internet. 

I never thought the Web was so intertwined into the Internet, I thought it more as a shoot off than an actual "younger form" of it. The Web is solely text, an article that you see through your browser. But the Internet involves images, MP3 files, and Netflix, the Web has nothing to do with that. 

Inskeep's next point was how this whole change was going to affect the consumer. Anderson's refereed back to when people believed that "in the world of professional content, the notion was that advertising was going to support everything." My immediate thought to his statement was when early in the interview he had said the Internet allows us to go everywhere. But how would people see the advertisements? He then brought up the point of now having to pay to see the content of a site. I do not agree with that at all, the Internet is supposed to help people get access to information. And now they are going to set up even more roadblocks? It is hard enough to even sort through everything with all the bogus stuff posted on the Google search engine. I would not want to pay for information I am not even sure I actually need until I read through it. I guess it will make people more aware of what they are actually for, but I enjoy to just search through random articles. That is how I found Susan Hiller, just looking at random articles, and now I am going to have to pay for that. It is ridiculous. 

I do hope Anderson is right when he said another big change coming soon on the Internet. There is just too much unneeded information that is posted on the Internet. Overall though, I found this article really information and would recommend it to anyone that is interested in the "future internet/advertisements."


Article Link: 
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129270704