Month: September 2020 (Page 2 of 7)

One thing lacking in art of the past wasn’t in the art itself, but in the way the academy (education)  approached art. It is mentioned by author Walter Gropius that the way in which the academy taught art, resulted in something called “Isolation of the Artist”. He states that “The fundamental pedagogic mistake of the academy arose from its preoccupation with the idea of the individual genius and its discounting the value of commendable achievement on a less exalted scale” (Gropius 310). This led to a high number of unsuccessful artists, useless by product of their schooling. With this Gropius suggests that what lacked in the art of the past was a different approach to how it was taught. 

Looking for hope in the future art, authors Herbert Bayer, present ideas to improve it, like the idea of Universal Communication. He believes that the amount of different languages we have have led to barriers of communication and as a solution to this problem, suggests “a more universal visual medium to bridge a gap between them” (Bayer 47). Artists have taken their part in beginning to evolve such communication gaps, and now, he wants scientists to do the same. Bayer believes the main support systems for this idea could be pictorial communication, which is already an older concept, and should now be adapted into text-picture integration. 

Another idea he suggests is square spanning. Traditionally, we read texts horizontally, but how about we begin to adapt to vertical reading? “There is no reason for this to be the only method to transmit language to the eye. sentences could as well follow each other vertically or otherwise, if it would facilitate reading” (Bayer 47). Grouping words into short lines horizontally can ease understanding and help. Both of the above ideas help form complementary images and will also have to bring about a change to the colors used on prints to better associate images and vertical text groups to their meanings, helping understand. 

Author László Moholy-naGy believes that “The creative work of the artist, the scientist’s experiments, the calculations of the businessman or the present-day politician..” ( Moholy-naGy 33) is what binds together the roles typography, photography, and other media play in the new art. Using for example the long term effect of the printer; something one man invented that is now used in various forms, such as photography, stereotype, electrotype, phototype, etc. “Only quite recently has there been typographic work that uses the contrasts of typographic material (letters, signs, positive and negative values of the plane) in an attempt to establish a correspondence with modern life” (Moholy-naGy 34). However, it hasn’t had much effect, and so Moholy-naGy believes that also embracing different techniques in other areas of typography, photography, and other media can be more effective to new art. He admits that in this new type of work, things will have to be different from the linear typography that is used today, but is confident that they can be well worth it and effective in new art. He goes on to give ideas for future uses like printing presses having their own block-making plant and printing with X-ray radiography. 

According to Walter Gropius, the artist of the past created art based on experience, working their way up from the bottom, living as part of the community, and participating in life. However, artists now are taught that art is a profession that can be mastered by studying it. He feels quality and talent cannot be taught, however, manual dexterity can. “…manual dexterity and the thorough knowledge which is a necessary foundation for all creative effort, whether the workman’s or the artist’s, can be taught and learned” ( Gropius 310). The skill of performing artistic tasks manually is something Gropius feels the academy can teach artists. He also believes that they can teach artists to connect their art to the community with things like their use of materials so that they don’t end up with a great idea like the art-proletariat movement that ends up in the ruin because of lack of connection to the community.                        

An idea that needs to be updated is the way in which art is taught in schools and academies; taking for example the Bauhaus at Weimar. The Bauhaus was a school in Germany that decided to take a different approach to teach the art in order to produce more successful artists and give them a more expansive understanding of it. Its statement of belief was, “‘ The Bauhaus strives to coordinate all creative effort, to achieve, in a new architecture, the unification of all training in art and design.  The ultimate, if the distant, goal of the Bauhaus is the collective work of art– the Building in which no barriers exist between the structural and decorative art’” ( Gropius 311). This is an idea that needs to be updated and applied to all art academies. Another idea I believe should be updated and used in the 21st century was the idea of Universal Communication, presented by Walter Gropius advocating for a bridge in the communication barrier through the arts. 

The absolute constant in Art will always remain its inconsistency. The never-ending changes, some abrupt, and other expected are the root of Art. Its essence derived from challenges and risks, mankind seeking meaning to its existence. Every generation finds its way to communicate through art, but they don’t all share the same beliefs. Every artistic wave immerses from the discontent of an existing one. Herbert believes we’ve come to appreciate less with time. His prediction of the future entails the death of books that are ultimately replaced by microfilms which will change the design of libraries. 

While Herbert described technology as the decline of all types, Lazslo on the other hand not only embraces technology and states it will play a key role in the advancement of Art. In his view, photography can communicate some emotions better than typography could. The relationship between humans and machines is a very complex one. Cohabitation seems like the best path to adopt but it certainly is not a smooth one.

Evolution is inevitable, whether we choose to adapt or not is one aspect we can control. The skills to adapt to change are simply acquired by repeating the same task or the same technique over time. It’s gained by understanding the true nature of our craft. As Walter Gropius explained, the best artists do not rely on technique and study, but the mastery and the understanding of forms and theory to truly grasp the knowledge of the field. 

According to Herbert Bayer, he believes that art is lacking typography back in his day.“it must, unfortunately, be remembered that we live in a time of great ignorance and lack of concern with the alphabet, writing, and typography.” Herbert Bayer created the Bauhaus typography, he believes that technology will replace the way we read. “the storage of books will be replaced by microfilms, which in turn will change the design of libraries.” The role that typography, photography and other media plays in art is that it conveys a message, photos of protests have a message by just looking at that photo. For example, “once more it became clear that typography is not self-expression within predetermined aesthetics, but that it is conditioned by the message it visualizes.” (Herbert Bayer).László Moholy-Nagy merges typography and photography into typophoto, and believes typography and photography is the same. “Typography is communication composed in type. Photography is the visual presentation of what can be optically apprehended. Typophoto is the visually most exact rendering of communication.” Walter Gropius believed that modern paintings and breaking old conventions and having training will lead to new art in the future. “But when, in the future, artists who sense new creative values have had practical training in the industrial world, they will themselves possess the means for realizing those values immediately. They will compel industry to serve their idea and industry will seek out and utilize their comprehensive training.” He also believes that ‘The Academy’ is not a good way to learn about art. “Schooling alone can never produce art! Whether the finished product is an exercise in ingenuity or a work of art depends on the talent of the individual who creates it. This quality cannot be taught and cannot be learned.“ He is saying art is creativity within one’s self, it cannot be taught.

With the establishment of the Bauhaus, a new idea of being artists comes to surface. The artist of the past is not good enough because they are tought theory and to follow specific rules, but they were never given the freedom to practice and explore their own creativity. With the founding of the Bauhaus school, Walter Gropius intends to change that. The artist of the future needs to learn theory and foundations yes, but they also need to incouraged to explore the world outside of the classroom, explore creativity outside of rules set by their instructors. Only this way they can bring the best out of themselves and design unique products.  Artists also need to learn the new language of graphic design, only this way they can communicate their ideas appropriately. T

When Laszlo Moholy-Nagy joined the Bauhaus, he introduced new technologies in the practice of graphic design. With technology, a revolution in the world of typography started to happen. Herbert Bayer designed the Universal alphabet, which started a revolution in Typography. Because of the introduction of new technologies, typography needed to evolve to the same level. Typography because it’s a tool of visual communication. Different typefaces convey different meanings and feelings. These ideas are still true to this day. 

My thoughts on the reading:

Machines are taking the life out of our society, We all essentially bow down to it as we’ve become extremely reliant on mechanical labor. It is because of these technological advancements that we’ve lost our sense of being, of individuality. However, since we can’t take away the mechanical system we’ve trapped ourselves into, It is up to the individual to change their perception, intentions, and attitude to this new and ever-evolving way of life. However, that does not top say that all machines are bad. Previously, artists or those with artistic spirit were limited to what type of school they attended and if they could attend school at all. This system brought about social isolation, Identifying artists by scholarship rather than artistic merit. It also put a societal label on what “aft” is. Rather than leaving it up to the artist and consumer themselves. Artistic expression was no longer that, but a lecture on what it should be rather than what it can be. That’s not to say, however, that school isn’t important. School can teach us discipline, foundation, and habit. Yet art should be built upon these teachings rather be limited to said teachings. In a sense, by combining. Both the academic and the freedom of individual expression, only then can artist master their craft, even in the presence of a mechanical future. This can give life to new forms of artistic expression, of construction, of collaboration, and so much more that can not be obtained when limiting oneself to individual factions. In actuality, the advancement of technology and all that comes with it is built of the idea of unity. Rather than letting it separate us, we as people and artists should make the conscious effort to allow it to unify us. Be it through posters, illustrations, Commercial design; as time moves on we are producing for a mass market, interacting and communicating with people we might not have before. It is because of this that we must also think harder about what we say and produce as language is one of if not the most important, powerful, and influential tools we have.

From the first article I believe Marinetti envisions a big revolution as the new decades approaches. He mentions a lot more of destruction and war and wants the new revolution or artist to be wiling to promote that I their pieces. He mentions “Beauty exits only in struggle. There is no masterpiece that has an aggressive character.” However he also mentions “Poetry must be a violent assault on the forces of the unknown, to force them to vow before man.” Would this be him trying to say for artist to bring unknown topics or maybe ideas that people might stay away from or maybe people see some ideas as shameful?.

In the second article, Rodchenko mentions a lot more of the power of Graphic Design being an essential part in society. He together with his wife Stepanova “positioned artist as agents of social change standing at the center of a brave new world. He also mentions that technology wasn’t created by men but that men themselves or more like artist themselves learned to use technology accordingly for their benefit. He called themselves “Artists yesterday, constructors today”. However there was a line that he mentions where he said “Technology is the mortal enemy of art” I believe maybe he was trying to say that art being created by hand is more meaningful than created on screen. For example like a signature is more personal when created by hand than when you sign on a device.

Overall I believe Rochenko and Lissitzky would agree with each other when they talk about technology. Lissitzky sees technology as a helpful material to produce variations of the first invention. He also mentions “What we find, more or less, in the art of printing are masterly variations accompanied by technical improvement in the production of the instruments.’ Stating that technology as it helps with new variations, it will also help with improvements of these inventions. I believe without technology none of these inventions would be appreciated the way they are today. Art was transformed with technology because there are many new ways to create it and to promote it.

A lot of the authors hinted that hand-made work would be replaced by machines. Lissitzky used Gutenberg as an example of the new changes brought by technology. Rodchenko was tired of working by hands and new that this age would remove a lot of the manual work thanks to new ways to perform tasks. I’m not sure if some of them were also mentioning that art would change to digital; maybe photoshop? I guess for Marinetti he felt that artists’ work were overlooked and so it was useless and then suggested that they would destroy museums and places where art is often showcased.

Rodchenko kept referring to lines and grid which is pretty much how a lot of softwares are. Grids are essential in design in general. It’s interesting he uses the shape square which to mean refers to the creation of pixel used in every device.

I think that Marinetti would not agree with the rest. They all seem to be focused on art and technology but not on the same page. Lissitzky and Rodchenko mentioned the new age of technology and how it would replace a lot of the old ways of doing things. I think that Marinetti war theme is problematic. He tries to glorify war and also to dislike a lot movements that are often seen as empowering. I think that technology remains the future even now.