Last week our class visited the Student Art Gallery in Woods Hall. The art exhibit that was going on at the time was called Syn Arts Cotillion. Syn Arts is short for synesthesia art and, by definition, is a kind of art that tends to evoke synesthesia or a mixing of the senses. There were a wide variety of art forms being presented in the gallery, but all of them shared the common classification of synesthetic art. Some of them were three-dimensional pieces of art, some were paintings, and still others were collages or photographs. All of them seemed to give the viewer a feeling that there was a deeper, more abstract meaning that just what they could see painted or sculpted in front of them. I, personally, picked four different works of art that I found interesting. They can also be put into pairs and compared very easily. Two of them are photography pieces by Jonathan Purvis, Rufus Davis and Rachel Higgins’ Going Away Party Between 12:30am and 1:30am. The other two pieces are sculptures of some sort by Alon Wingard and Katie McClung. Wingard sculpted a piece called Left right and McClung’s sculpture is called Birmingham vs. Broccoli.
When I first entered the exhibit a large number of the pieces being showcased caught my eye. They all varied in so many ways except in the way that they grabbed my attention. The pieces in the exhibit were interesting because of the fact that they were not what I usually think of as art. That is not to say that what our class saw in Woods Hall was not art. Every single piece on display was art, in my opinion. Most of the pieces just didn’t fit the bill of what I always think of when art comes to mind. This is because my definition for art has always been a narrow-minded one involving 18th and 19th century museum displays.
One piece that really caught my attention during my first trip around the exhibit was Left right. At first glance it appears to be a mass of wooden sticks poking out in all directions, protruding from some sort of base. After examining it closer, I noticed that the thing that the sticks were poking out of appeared to be a boat or canoe with a ribcage-like side. The sharp rods also had a fairly organized way of sticking out of the boat-like structure. They all either poked up or to the side. To me this piece exhibited order within chaos and vice versa. The actual boat structure was streamline and beautifully carved, and it and the rods were made of poplar wood. The sharp rods gave the sculpture a disorderly look about it. In addition, they seemed to give the boat a dangerous element while the boat structure gave it an adventurous theme. The sculpture also had one rod which was much taller that the others and reminded me of the mast of a sailboat. The boat seemed like it was meant to appeal to somebody adventurous and brave. The artist could also have meant to let each person take their own meaning from it. In addition, there is also the possibility that the boat with the sharp sticks didn’t really represent anything more than what could be concretely viewed.
The other sculpture I examined, Birmingham vs. Broccoli, was similar to Left right in that it had abstract elements protruding from a more orderly base. The bronze sculpture consisted of a rectangular building with small windows cut out in several places. The top of it had a hand sticking out of it with squared fingers that had a firm grip on several pieces of broccoli. The pieces of broccoli were painted with a dark shade of green so that they stood out from the bronze color of the rest of the statue. The two main elements in the sculpture clashed greatly, but they also seemed to illustrate the relationship between two different things. Somehow, the broccoli and hand stood for one thing and the building stood for another. It’s possible that the artist was contrasting industry with agriculture, urban areas with rural areas, or something else. I think that it did represent one of these comparisons with the most likely being industry versus agriculture. The hand and broccoli could represent the working farmer and his produce while the building could represent the offices of some business or company. It’s also possible as with Left right that there is no that deep of a meaning associated with the piece, or the artist could possibly be allowing the viewer to interpret it for him or herself.
The last two pieces I looked at, Rufus Davis and Rachel Higgins’ Going Away Party…, were photography pieces by the same artist. They were both black and white silver gelatin prints of people that did not appear to be significantly altered. This is where the similarities pretty much end for the two pieces because the moods that they convey are completely opposite. Rufus Davis is a close-up picture of a Black World War II veteran who is wearing a hat that labels him as such. This picture gave me an initial feeling of melancholy and sadness, not because of the fact that he is a veteran, but because of the worn, sad expression on his face. In contrast, I was also overcome with respect because of that fact that he a veteran and he had probably been through a lot. This gave me an appreciation for veterans and the way they fight to protect our freedom, but it also showed me the effects that war can have on the people that fight in them. In addition to the actual picture the title itself showed that the artist was trying to emphasize the fact that the person in the photograph is an actual individual. This goes against the way we usually view the military as one big unit rather than people with feelings and dreams just like everybody else.
The other piece by Jonathan Purvis, Rachel Higgins’ Going Away Party…, consisted of 16 small pictures to create one big collage. It not only differed from the other piece in its number of photos, but also in the mood that it conveyed. It depicted different people having their photos taken in some kind of photo booth. All of them were extremely happy and jovial as well as probably somewhat intoxicated. It definitely pictured a party atmosphere with different people dancing, hugging, holding drinks, and even wearing masks. They were making funny poses and stances and giving the camera comical looks. It was immediately obvious that these people were having a big celebration, and the title helps to get that across. They obviously wanted to have a blowout to see their friend off, and the mood was probably somewhat bittersweet because their friend was leaving.
All of these pieces show why art can come in so many different forms. Many people try to say that certain pieces of work should not be considered art. The truth is that each person has their own definition of art and preferences as to what kinds of art inspire them. It is very hard to give a precise definition of art because everybody interprets it in a different way. The art in the SynArts exhibit was no exception. Some pieces were more common pieces of art than others. Some pieces even caused the viewer to question whether it was art. However, all the pieces in the SynArts exhibit contributed something to the artistic atmosphere of the gallery, and when I left the exhibit I had a greater appreciation for art than when I walked in.
No comments:
Post a Comment