ARTH 1103 Survey of Art

Pollock one of the most questionable painters of all time has change the course in which I see art. When I asked people to look at Pollock’s work, they don’t see anything but when I see his work, I see movements, a sense of pride, and I see art.  People can call it a hot mess but only the artist knows what his intentions were when he produced this type of artistic piece. Pollock ‘s innovative way of producing this piece of art stunned many and I really appreciate  what was done to captivate the minds of those who do not see the different types of art do not always show.

Willem de Kooning mostly focuses on drawing woman. I found this in the second room, which I believe is The Breakthrough Years. The painting is called Untitled (Two Women). At first I couldn’t tell that the figure on the right was a woman until a few minutes passed and realized she had breast. I was impressed by this abstract painting. The colors really stand out a lot in this painting. I think he combined the seated women and the regular women standing from his other paintings. The woman on the left on the seat is wearing a pink dress and her face looks all deformed. The woman standing up is all orange and it does not look like any women’s body but I guess that’s Willem de Kooning’s style. He put random warm colors and shapes around the women sitting down, which made it look more interesting and catches the eye.

I was in the section New Direction in the Museum of Modern Art and that’s where I saw an amazing painting. The name of the painting is called Untitled V and was done in the year 1980. It’s oil on canvas. This painting really stood out to me just because I love abstract work so much! It really came to life; I can literally see it all in motion. The color emphasized it all. It looks as if there was a muscular man made up of crystal and he was standing on a crystal mountain. It looks like superman’s lair (Fortress of Solitude) but at the same time I see waterfalls. There’s some interesting cracks on the crystal man, which made it seem like if there was some sort of power flowing but I’m not so sure what it was done for.

The thing that strikes me when I looked at it for the first time was what is it and what does it mean. The painting look like a little kid made this art work. The women in the painting look so weird they don’t look real at all. I think it was very controversial the painting had during the time.  Women would be mad at the painting because they don’t think they would look like that.  Another reason is that some artist may think this is not artwork but a children works.

When I observed Picasso’s painting, i noticed that the women in it had male bodies. When you compare the preparatory drawings to the painting itself, you see that these women are very muscular. There are a lot of deformities in their faces too which can give off the impression that they are men.

If all paintings from the Impressionism time and Post-Impressionism time angered many people, then I have no doubt Picasso’s ‘Les Demoiselles D’Avignon’ pissed off even more people. Around those times I noticed that if you tend to stray from the methods of the renaissance (linear perspective and the like) or if you made ordinary people nude and engaging with audiences (viewers) then it was an outrage and considered practically garbage. For example, Monet’s ‘Impression:Sunrise’ was not considered art. Why because it mostly contained colors and was not a detailed painting of a sunrise with a serene background. Another example is Gustave’s ‘Stone Breakers’. This was a painting mainly about the lower class doing manual labor and this wasn’t considered art because of it. it wasn’t pleasant or mythical or enchanting in anyway but instead it was just a peak into the lives of the lower class and to many, not considered art. Picasso’s work basically ‘threw out’ the ideals of making art (of those times) proportions, contre-pasto, etc.. and decided to take a different approach which is now under modern art and cubism. To audiences back then (and some now) the painting makes no sense; only for the three women on the left is there a bit of a sense of bodies but the other two are impossible shapes and positions. Also they are nude and in certain tantalizing positions and because we know they are people not goddesses, nymphs or other mythical creations, this painting was a piece that angered people. I personally like the painting; why because it’s a different way to look at a subject in this case the women from this brothel. To me art is a way to express your views or opinions on just about anything so there’s nothing wrong with this painting. What I get from the painting is real women come in all shapes and sizes. Also the woman with the shaded face, perhaps is wearing a hypothetical ‘mask’. When she ‘works’ she puts on a facade to do her job and get through the day. The other one, that her face and back are facing us, perhaps is a suggestion she can really put her body in some extreme positions that typically can not be done by everyone.

In the picture, on the bottom left, you can my version of a white peacock made into an origami form. I was able to make this white peacock from looking and other examples of a origami bird forms and watched a few videos on the making the body of the of the bird. Form that i was able to put my own twist into making my own version of the white peacock. It looks somewhat similar to what the real white peacock looks like. I was inspired to make one because I wanted to a challenge in taking something that is real and turn into an origami form to see if that is possible from the way the I can make it. So I guess you say that I have somewhat accomplished that goal.

This is an interesting read. Whether its true or not is up to you. Mona Lisa