Paper #2 Revision: Synesthetic Art

Discussing and Comparing Synesthetic Art

Last week our class visited the Student Art Gallery in Woods Hall. The art exhibit that was going on at the time was called SynArts Cotillion. SynArts is short for synesthetic 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 sculptures or some form of three-dimensional 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 than just what they could see painted or sculpted in front of them. I, personally, picked four different works of art that I found interesting and that I thought gave a fairly good sampling of the exhibit as a whole. 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.” I decided to look at all four of these pieces in detail and compare them in two separate pairs. I have also come to the conclusion that these pieces and the gallery as a whole did fit the definition of synesthetic art in the way they engaged my senses and emotions when I viewed the exhibit.

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 structure 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 gave the boat a dangerous element while the boat structure gave it an adventurous theme. The sculpture also had one rod which was much taller than the others and reminded me of the mast of a sailboat. I believe the boat was meant to appeal to somebody adventurous and brave. This piece appealed to me personally because of the uniqueness of it. The size and the wood used to make it also caught my attention.

The other sculpture I examined, “Birmingham vs. Broccoli,” was similar to “Left right” in that it was a sculpture with abstract elements protruding from a more orderly base. Other than that it was completely different from “Left right.” 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 illustrated the relationship between two different things. 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 or urban areas with rural areas. I think that it did represent one of these comparisons with the most likely being industry versus agriculture. The hand and broccoli represent the working farmer and his produce while the building represents the offices of some business or company. This piece did not catch my attention quite as quickly as “Left right,” but this piece intrigued me because of the combination of elements that made it up.

The last two pieces that caught my attention, “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. They were also placed right next to the entrance to the exhibit which is one of the reasons they caught my eye. 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 was a veteran and 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. This piece caught my eye because of the expression on the man’s face and because of the emotion it conveyed.

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 by Purvis 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 and probably somewhat intoxicated. It definitely pictured a party atmosphere with different people dancing, hugging, holding drinks, and even wearing masks. They were also 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 no doubt bittersweet because their friend was leaving. This grouping of pictures intrigued me because of the atmosphere it conveyed, and it was obviously aimed at people who like to party and have a good time with their friends. I was also interested in it because of its placement next to a very different piece, “Rufus Davis.”

All of these pieces show why synesthetic art is a diverse form of art that can come in a variety of forms. I did not actually experience a confusing of my senses when a walked around the gallery, but I did have a sensation that my senses were being more engaged than when I go to a typical art gallery that showcases 17th or 18th century art. My senses of sight and touch were especially engaged. Even my senses of smell and hearing were somewhat involved in the experience even if by nothing but sheer imagination. This is because the art that I saw really engaged my imagination, which can be seen as a sort of “sixth sense” which ties the other five together. I would even venture to say that the reason that the sensation of synesthesia works in the first place is because of our “senses” of imagination. In addition to the engaging of my senses, my emotions were also involved in my viewing of the gallery. Each piece evoked different emotions, whether positive or negative. I also felt like many of the artists were conveying synesthesia or the experience of synesthesia with their particular art form instead of actually trying to make the viewer experience it him or herself.

It is very hard to give a precise definition of synesthetic art because everybody who went to that gallery probably experienced something different than the next person who walked in. 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 sense of synesthesia, whether literal or not, and, as a result, the gallery as a whole definitely fit the definition of synesthetic art. After leaving the exhibit I had learned about a type of art that I had never even heard of before and had acquired a definite appreciation for it.