COMD3504 - Section OL01 - Fall 2020

Month: September 2020 (Page 1 of 6)

Assignment 3

The artists presented in the three readings present their different approaches when it comes to the future of art, and what different technologies hold. Their work can collectively be termed as the futuristic manifesto. According to the three authors, the future is endowed with speedy technologies that will deliver art to the world within a short period. Time and space are the possibilities of the future. The future of simultaneous implementations is what the authors envision. As technology will play the role of speedy art, the authors are optimistic that they will be propped to the stars.

The art and design that would follow is one of promise. As the artists flourish in their skill set, they anticipate a future that is constructive and creative and nature.  They anticipate a future in which they will be innovators, more like modern-day engineers. In their collective thought of the future, the artists share in the common views of a technology that will help shape art and design. They also share in the common view that artists are the future creators and innovators. Despite their common perception of the future, they hold different views on how the future will be. Filippo Tomaso talks of beauty that is characterized by struggles. This is not what the other artists foresee. They see a future of splendor and beauty.

Artists are creators of the future. Even in their pieces of work, they normally have the future engraved in their art pieces. Since they are creators, they can be termed as engineers. This is the first statement that is true in the read pieces. Technology is a catalyst for speedy artistic growth. This is the second factual statement. Despite the truth, the mention of the fact that beauty exists in the struggle is problematic, as humanity cannot achieve.

Assignment 3

This article describes the intention of how these authors of manifesto insight on the future and how technology affects design. These manifestos are rather futurist biased which is why the way they speak in their manifesto is rather aggressive and out of nature for some people. The main purpose of this article was to show the desire of design being used by  technology , and how it is being used.

For Marinetti’s manifesto the invention of technology has caused him to believe that traditional use of design and art have no uses as more inventions of technology are being used. He also mentions how Marinetti and the people before them are considered scrap for the new generation to take over and to do better than what they can do.  Rochendiko believes the past method of use of design now considers old and the new system of design is what meant to be used in the future. These jobs are not considered artistic for Rochendiko and others but rather the job of designing such things are more constructivistic than artistic. He also mentions that it is a bandwagon people jump on when it comes to.

Our Book from El Litisizky explains that technology holds more power than it would usually do for design and it is taking over what used to be  the traditional design that has been used for a couple of decades. It wasn’t that much of an importance to me as it does not relate to the designer today since we use both traditional and technology based design and I don’t believe any of them are going to fall off anytime soon.

Assignment 4 for October 5

Our next reading assignment is 3 short texts from architect-designer-artists affiliated with the Bauhaus. They are as follows:

Walter Gropius; The Theory and Organization of the Bauhaus (1923): Gropius_Bauhaus

László Moholy-Nagy; Typophoto (1925): MoholyNagy_Typophoto

Herbert Bayer; On Typography (1967): Bayer_OnTypography

Here are some ideas and questions you might consider while reading these texts:
According to these  authors, what is lacking in art of the past? What sort of new strategies or ideas will lead to a new art for the future?  What role, according to these authors, should typography, photography, and other media play in the new art?  What role should language play in art and design? What should education or “the academy” teach artists about their field? Which of these ideas need to be updated and which continue to hold true in 21st century art and design?

Please also remember that your first 2-3 page paper is due on October 14 (yes, that is a Wednesday). You are strongly encouraged to start thinking about, if not actively working on, this assignment. The question and requirements are as follows:

First Paper – Due October 14
Select a design or design object created after 1969 in which the influence of the theories considered thus far can be seen. Begin with a brief description of the object, the designer who created it, and the historical circumstances under which it was made. Considering these factors, examine the ways in which the creator was responding, directly or indirectly, to theories related to linguistics or semiology, avant-garde art movements or Gestalt psychology (ie. any of the ideas that we’ve covered). Discuss the manner in which the design you’ve chosen embodies these theories. Provide direct references to relevant passages from our readings. Locate additional writings using library resources to substantiate your comparisons.

Your goal is ultimately to provide a critical examination, not an account of historical details.

This response will be submitted as a 750-1000 word typewritten paper, double-spaced in 12 pt. Times New Roman. Include images of the work under consideration and any other relevant illustrations. Cite all materials researched for historical context, any related writings, and image sources. All sources, references and quotations should be cited in MLA format. You’ll upload your paper as a PDF, attached to a new OpenLab Post.

Assignment 3 – Ashley Leon.

Technology has played a huge role and made an impact on art and design. According to the article, we got to learn how 3 artists from the early 1900’s that have used technology in their work of art which now makes an impact to today’s world and art.

Starting with Marinetti Manifesto, according to the reading, it seemed that Marinetti looked to technology as a muse for Futurist art and saw technology as a way for humans to evolve and harness more power over nature and progress from the past. He magnified the excellence of the machine and the new innovation of the vehicle, with its speed, force, and development. He reflects his goal of discarding the art of the past and celebrating change, originality, and innovation in culture and society. Marinetti’s manifesto glorified the new technology of the automobile and the beauty of its speed, power, and movement.

In ‘Our Book’ by El Lissitzky’s he explores new material forms of book design while dematerializing it in the digital world. He mentions Gutenburg, the inventor of the system of printing movable type. There are masterly variations accompanied by technical improvement in the production of instruments. He explains that the idea that moves the masses today is called materialism but what really characterizes our time is dematerialization. He says “The amount of material used is decreasing, we are dematerializing, cumbersome masses of material are being supplanted by released energies”. I would have to agree because technology is becoming very powerful more than ever and can take over to a certain extent. 

Lastly, Aleksandr Rodchenko was more of an engineer than an artist. He used new innovation and large-scale manufacturing trying to give structure not simply to progressive ideas of functionalism and economy. He embraced and redefined graphic design as an essential form of society using his distinctive style which helped give visual voice to constructivism.

Assignment 3

This weeks reading assignment dealt with technology and vision for the future, artist, and design. In the futurist manifesto the ideals seemed very aggressive in nature and very linear in thought. The idea that one should not reflect on what has been don but to constantly think of moving forward, which I understand but I believe innovation comes from growing on what has already been done. He also focused on war as a form of freedom which I find to be destructive, I also found the reading to be very self centered in thought, and I believe are is a collective effort which comes from inspiration of not only the past but of what the future could be.

I believe that they all envisioned the future to be one where technology would take over, where man would be somewhat obsolete. To a certain extent they are correct in this thinking as we’re are in a technology driven age, and so much emphasis is placed on the youth and the ideas and views of the old are somewhat disregarded. El Lissitzky spoke on the importance of print, I still believe print is a very important and is still a great way of communicating to the masses.

In Who We Are he is focused on machinery and the spread of technological advancements to increase and advance design and the creation of things. I think he is right in this thinking because we use tools like photoshop illustrator and other apps and from of technology to output massive amounts of art and design daily, more than they could have ever imagined.

Assignment 3 – Garnet Garcia

Marinetti’s Manifesto Futurista has this anarchic energy and I want to talk about it for a bit simply because of how brash it was. From what I understand, he speaks of driving a car and crashing it in a ditch while the world looks on in horror at the scene. He speaks of speed and power, the rejection of the past, and this embracing of machinery, violence, and youth. My assumption is that he believe this was the future of art and intelligence. He believed technology wasn’t just going to shape the future, it was the future and with technology came the future of rashness and chaos. He says that “beauty exists only in struggle” as if the true art of the future can only be captured in wars, anarchy, and completely rejecting the knowledge that came before. There is this audacious aggression through out the entire manifesto.

Marinetti, Rodchenko, and Lissitzky all had a similar view point on 1) technology being the future of art and design and 2) the necessity to push way from the art knowledge of the past. I do believe however that Lissitzky’s push from the old into the new is the least violent of the 3. He speaks about the past in a tone that’s almost informative, as if to show the reader “this is where we came from and why”. Rodchenko speaks of the past in a way that draws the line a little more clearly, but he speaks less about the past being something inherently negative, and focuses more on the vision of constructivism. Marinetti, however, has a “burn it all” mentality to the past as if there’s nothing to learn or pull from.

I think all 3 artists knew that technology was going to change the world. I enjoyed Marinetti’s manifesto the most, but I didn’t agree with most of it. I do believe that about 100 years later we can clearly see how much technology has become not just the future, but our every day present. This whole world operates on speed because of the modern technology we have. The world has moved faster than ever before, and in a lot of ways the energy of Marinetti’s manifesto is the energy our world operates in today. However, I think the violence that is almost idolized in this passage is unnecessary and doesn’t necessarily benefit anyone. I also think it’s stupid to think that just because you don’t want to draw knowledge from the past you feel the need to destroy it all and hate it so much. Even Rodchenko recognizes that the tools of the line, the grid, and the point aren’t “new” concepts, they’ve just been rediscovered and used in a new way that embraces the mechanics of [at the time] modern technology. Lissitzky’s Our Book was the least interesting to me, even a little confusing, but I found it very interesting because in being able to talk about the patterns and development of art and technology in the past, we’re able to see how thing’s ended up playing out after. We have the answer for the next one to two question marks that he proposes on “Inventions in the Field of Thought-Communication” because we live in an age that has given us screens and audio books, and thus see “the new fundamental inventions in the field of book production”.    

Assignment 3- T.Twist

Technology has impacted and shaped the future of art and design. Squeezing itself, creating a new channel, and broadening the horizons for artists to explore in the art and design world. Based on the three readings during the 20th century, we get a look at how these three artists show a similar view on the changes technology has made.  

 In Marinetti Manifesto it speaks about the Futurism movement based in Italy. In this movement, it called out to artists that want to discard the past and embrace the dynamics of modern-day. While attacking the traditionalist, they sought out to break the preexistent norms. Marinetti used vivid imagery to tell a inspiring story to depict how the future will be. We can tell that he is fascinated by machinery and speed in the industrial age. He used the manifesto as a guide, a key to express how a something fresh will replace the traditional attraction and a new life will be born. In Marinetti Manifesto it tell us that modern day industry and technology will take over the art and design world. He states that we should take advantage of the technological achievements in an assertive manner and take action. Basically, telling us to embrace technology and use it to our advantage.

Aleksandr Rodchenko’s Who Are We speak about the constructivism period. This is a time in which mechanical objects are combined to create abstract and structural forms.  He strive to express that it’s time for a change that aims to influence artists in expressing themselves rather than serving the needs of society. Using your artistic abilities to create “constructively” so that society can benefit from it. This movement was to create order in a world full of chaos. Rodchenko stresses on the point “The first working group of constructivist”  referring to himself as a simple worker setting the foundation that it starts here with us. He wanted us to open our eyes and see that there is more than what meets eye. One can say that Rodchenko and Marinetti both had a similar view. Which is to embrace technology with open arms.

El Lissitzky’s Our Book took us on a different route to view the impacts of technology. He informs us how it influenced society. Expressing to us the material forms of book design and how it came about. At the same time predicting the dematerialization of it in decreasing the value of print and increasing the digital design world. He conveys to us at the beginning of the article “that art is a single event in time, has no evolution…Gutenburg the inventor of the system of printing from movable type…the highest achievement in book art”. I can tell that Lissitzky was a little saddened by the development. Since it was the first great invention and then it died down after the invention of photography. I fell that Lissitzky wanted society to build on Gutenberg’ printing press. Instead of waiting around, looking for the next invention to pop out the sky.

At first, I felt that he wasn’t into the whole change and the creation of something anew. However, as I continued to read I can see that he was looking forward to the future and what it enfolds. It’s like he foreshadowed that many problems will occur.  As a result, we should create, and build to enhance the future for the designers and artists to come. Lissitzky gave us an insight that with any new influences being brought about we will always lose some and gain some and that’s how the design world is. As we follow through he informs us about the letters, telephone, media, radio, and all great communication inventions. Increasing the level of communication, and the “material used”. Stating the time and effort it took to create all this. One can say that it is revealed to us how great and powerful communication is. It is a driving force with no hint of tradition, craft, or reminiscence on the past. However, it has expanded, transcend, and will continue to grow. Lissitzky complain to us that we have the tools to reconstruct the lives of many individuals. With on click, we can level off the playing field.

Today we can see that many problems have been addressed before we as the users came in contact with them. We are in a modern-day era that we can not only listen and converse in a conversation, but we can also participate and experience it. As a result, Lissitzky exclaims that this is our time, “Our Book”. Rodchenko states “we are the beginning, our work is today”.  I can tell you as a young designer I am often amazed and intrigued by the new revelations. I often find myself loosing myself in technology. That’s to tell you how powerful it is. Today there is always something new that arises and you have the urge to try it. How we interact with technology can make or break you. It comes with a lot of influences that can hinder you or help you. I think this will be the greatest challenge that we have to face and learn from.

Assignment #3 – Julian Townsend-T

Assignment #3

              All these authors saw the importance technology was going to have on design along with the advancement technology was going to have on our future. Each author knew the importance of technology, but each author also showed a different appreciation for it. Filippo Marinetti was a futurism, he took the importance of technology to the extreme, to the point where he felt like it was useless for someone so young to focus most of their time and study to “useless manuscripts”, rather they should focus on the present and future. Aleksandr Rodchenko and others, on the other hand knew the importance of technology but also knew the importance of using your hand and being an artist, artist has transformed into constructors and engineers. You need to start with the essential languages of design: shapes, lines pattern, color, material and so on. Every plane, building and wall was once a lines, squares and angles before they were the fully functional and stable product. Lastly, El Lissitzky saw the importance technology was going to have on the printing industry and artist. Books weren’t going to be solely for the rich, it was going to be produced for thousands of people, along with the value of a book is always going to stand, which is funny because it completely contradicts Filippo Marinetti ideology on technology.

              Each one of these authors/artist has one thing in common and that is technology is beautiful, along with technology is going to improve plenty of artist and they are going to have to learn to adapt to it as well. On the other hand, with a common ground always comes with disagreement and I believe there’s a couple of things these authors would disagree with. For starters I believe both Aleksandr and El Lissitzky have more in common then Marinetti, they both would disagree with his futurism ideas behind his appreciation for technology. Technology and art are not just used for violence and aggression, you do not need to have aggressive attitude to be a poet or artist, there is more then one emotion an artist can bring to his/her work. It is ignorant to think that there is only one emotion an artist needs to display. Anger and aggression do not get planes and building built, anger and aggression isn’t what makes beautiful book covers, with both these things you need a calm, peaceful and precise mind to make any of these compositions. Not only that, books, libraries and museums are essential to both Aleksandr and El Lissitzky, how can you know the right dimensions of planes and buildings? How are you going to know what failed or succeeded? whats the point of print books if they need to be demolished? Bottomline is you cannot succeed without books; you cannot grow without prior knowledge of past successors, knowledge is key.

Assignment 3 – Briana Burton

        I think these author ‘s were predicting that the future of art would be based on technology that would enhance the creative process in a fast and productive way. One author spoke about previous art forms that were abstract where the lines and shapes were less obvious to the common eye. Now, with technology lines and grids are used more and easier to see. As artist evolve overtime, some adapt to the new technologies and shape the world of art as it is known today.

        El Lissitzky, who produced influential work during the 1920s was concerned about the changes that would be made with material used in his time and the same material used in the advanced technology world/digital world. He thought that technology would continue to evolve as time goes on. He said that “the idea that moves the masses today is called materialism.” This has brought up the question of how technology will be used in the future.

        Rodchenko and Lissitzky both believed in the idea of constructivism. Lissitzky’s idea on technology is that though it has evolved it is still based on the original idea. I believe that Rodchenko is also saying technology is evolving. However, Marinetti believed in the idea of futurism. He made comparisons about the past and the future but seems to embrace the future. He mentioned key aspects about futurism such as car, ships and violence. He wrote in his manifesto of futurism “We declare that the splendor of the world has been enriched by a new beauty: The beauty is speed.”

Assignment 3 Gabe Morales

This weeks’ readings were talking about technology and how it influences art and design. 

Marinetti’s The Futurist Manifesto spoke about technology through a story. The line “Alone with the engineers in the infernal stokeholes of great ships, alone with the black spirits which rage in the belly of rogue locomotives, alone with the drunkards beating their wins against the wall.” The imagery he shows in this line helped me understand the story the second time I read it. I envisioned the cars and boats and planes he speaks about and understood that there is immense pride in designing items that help revolutionize travel and society.

And further on “we today are founding futurism, because we want to deliver Italy from its gangrene of professors, archaeologists, tourist guides and antiquaries.” the desire to create new technology to help citizens in their everyday lives. And the final paragraphs saying “The oldest among us are not yet thirty, and yet we have already wasted treasures, treasures of strength, love, courage and keen will, hastily, deliriously, without thinking, with all our might, till we are out of breath.” we get the sense that a designer’s work is never done.

In El Lissitzky’s Our Book he discusses specific technology that has influenced our society and how humanity has also demanded solutions to problems we didn’t even know we had. He mentions Gutenbergs’ moveable type machine which was revolutionary. He mentions in the reading that as we have more people with access to writing and mailing letters, the more that the corresponding business grows and it will eventually need improvement or change so it can work better. So once the telephone was invented and more people gained access to it, people were now calling each other rather than writing letters so it relieved stress on the mail industry. The need was changed and then people gravitated to what was easier for them. Lissitzky also gives an example of a book. Starting out as a bound book with separate pages, then with color, and as times progressed we invented posters, then large scale advertisements meant to be seen on highways and on roads.

Rodchenko has a similar theme in his Manifesto of the Constructivist Group, People might see a wall or a plane but it is up to artists and designers to create things from nothing. We then see amazing inventions like the zeppelin, a helicopter…etc. He restates this thought with “We-are the beginning our work is today.”

« Older posts