Szenina Russo
1. For each video and article list/discuss the key concepts you learned.
The CARTA video discusses how symmetry has always been a major factor in how we view beauty. Homo sapiens have produces cave paintings of figures and animals, along with playing with composition. Art and aesthetic definition was use of symbols to communicate ideas, express language, efficacy and art history. Throughout the development of the human brain, the thought processes as well as social and cultural advancements. The idea of how humans are conscientious animals, which highly affects our processes, visual ideas and creativity. The break down of the artists choices of representation makes up their style was very interesting. The brain activity shown when humans are exposed to art visually shows how our brains react to it chemically. There are also examples of activity in the brain when sad or depressed emotions are felt, this is in comparison to activity in the brain when looking at art. The video talks about context, I agree that art does makes us aware through ideas conveyed in art. The brain is able to understand and react the most to visible words, emotions and art.
Ramachandran studied in Indian and the relationship of divinities, gods, goddesses to human interpretation. It was interesting how he discussed how western cultures viewed the goddess of beauty of another culture, ugly. Picasso’s distortion of the human body in comparison with a sculptor from India was an interesting way to compare diverse styles in cultures. There are universal laws that he discusses that have to do with style in culture. Laws in art include contrast, symmetry, metaphors, conscientious, problem-solving and other aspects that affect beauty and creativity in cultures. He also goes into depth about how the brain takes non-representational art and the process of coming to an end result in ascetics. What, how and why are three basic ways to take the laws in art and apply them to art.
The video that discussed the philosophy of aesthetics in art focuses upon philosophers dating back to Plato. Plato states that beauty isn't stated upon the arts or poets it was centered around tragedy, what was popular at that time. This was because they confuse reality to real and is able to influence all types of people. He believed objects own nature was beautiful. Alberti believes in proportion, symmetry, harmony and order when speaking about beauty. Modern ways of thinking about beauty or aesthetics has to do with understanding and knowledge of art to appreciate it. The enlightenment had a lot of influence on the way of thinking during that time, and rational understanding. Alexander Gottlieb Baumgarten views aesthetics is constrained by nature and imagination is needed to treat beauty in art. Romantics following 1850, Kaunt thought there wasn't a place that could teach mastery art. Hagel expresses art as a spiritualization within art. It is a sensible object for the spirit and the beautiful is the sensible reflection of the absolute. Aesthetics also argues that art is not needed in society any longer, art was able to define things in life that other subjects were unable to express especially about religion. He said that romanticism was the last exploration in aesthetics. The twentieth century largest issue was the notion of art itself. The dominant view was the expression, art the expression of emotion. Philosophers didn't agree with the definition of this word. Wittgenstein thought that language should be used for its main root meaning. Morris Whites thought that resemblances in art is only critical, art should be based on the ideas it represents, like Marcel Duchamp does. Avant-garde was integrated into everyday culture eventually in the twentieth century. That the everyday includes so much visual stimulation. It was interesting that a philosopher in the twentieth century mentioned, art makes the lives of the people it is a sociological phenomenon. Television has a huge affect in aesthetics in art and the way intellectuals view art. To appreciate and understand art has changed drastically throughout the ages up until the twentieth century.
The CNN article reviews how the brain translates the visual arts, it is discussed as a ‘lie’. Representation in art uses elements and principles of design that translate and create meaning for individual people. Cavanagh states in the article that we interpret our surrounding areas and use line to represent the three dimensional world. He also mentions that the use of the line was the first form of visual imagery that we have used since the Stone Age. Cavanagh speaks of how humans are aware of themselves and other species, we often look for faces in art. Margaret Livingstone has studied how luminance has an affect on our ability to recognize objects and faces, then detail. Color is used in representation of people and objects to create three dimensional objects. The use of shadow, light and rendering of objects create optical illusions. For an example the Mona Lisa illusion is successful because the peripheral visual system picks up different values, changing her smile and face. The idea of beauty is mentioned, living things have symmetry so to us it is seen as beautiful. Abstract art is non-representational and is based on line and shapes. Tinbergen compares animals in nature to recognizing shapes and relating it to reality, humans do this with art. Zeki explains that neoscience can be used to understand the brain and apply that to visual imagery. His knowledge produced white sculptures on white walls in an exhibition. The sculptors have red and white light on them, so the shadows produce their complementary color.
2. Which philosopher's theroy on aesthetics do you feel is most important? Be sure to mention the philosphers name, era (time in history), and contribution to the aesthetic theory in your response.
The philosopher that I thought was influential, diverse and interesting was Immanuel Kant. He was a philosopher in the eighteenth century in Germany. He discusses how the only ugliness in the world has to do with the disgusting. The discussion of how pleasure and beauty went together, Kant discusses this idea and explores how beauty has a lot of different meanings. That pleasure plays an important role and the disgusting causes pain, therefore one would want to get it out their system. I thought these ideas were really interesting because you can beautify the ugly but not the discussing. That there is a physical and mental reaction in humans that differ that ugly. There is no exact science of the beautiful, there is no description. I agree with this idea more than symmetry or other themes relating to beauty. Beauty is a promise, I thought this was a really pure and interesting concept because this connects beauty with relationship with people or objects to humans. This is the way that I personally have always viewed art and the themes that go hand in hand with it such as aesthetics. I think there is a lot of different definitions to beauty according to different people because we don't all view the world the same.
3. What do you think about Changeux and Ramachandran scientific view of aesthetics and art? What was the most interesting fact you discovered from each speaker's lecture?
Changeux begins with homo sapiens and relates the basis of the knowledge discussed there to more current art related themes. I think that his view is very cut and dry, he is specific to definitions and graphs of physical change. A lot of his theories are on the changes physically and how art is apart of the brain evolution through time. Changeux was able to convey emotional ideas to art and how it affects human brain activity. The way that words evoke activity in the brain was interesting. Language plays a large role in human creativity.
Ramachandran’s view on aesthetics in art is shaped around laws in art and how the brain translates objects and comes to an outcome. His talk was very interesting because he discusses elements in art and the brain's way of processing line, color and shape to create meaning. He provides multiple different instances where the neurons in the brain have an effect on how we view the world and beauty. He centers his talk around culture and how that differs according to certain cultures and what they are surrounded with in their lives.
4. How do the videos and article relate to the readings in the text?
The text and videos are similar because they discuss human nature and how visual imagery has impacted us. The video talks about not only the scientific ideas but also how art is provided and received in society. The video refers to history in antiquity and how humans brains have changed, associated with visual imagery in society. There seems to be knowledge about the social aspects of humans in relation to art, where as in the text it is factual based on artists. The text uses specific artists from different time periods and how it is related to themes in art. The videos were personable, that was nice to experience with new themes or ideas. The video also discusses how the brain takes shapes and colors and wants to make sense of them, so it creates possibilities in art. Both of the article and the article talk about how a chick, an animal, uses neurons in their brain to recognize shapes such as a beak to relate it to their mother. This is compared to people buying abstract art today.
The video based on the philosophy of aesthetics is connects to the visual components in the text. I thought this was an interesting level and analytical way of thinking about art. I think that is the foundation of art is not just based on if something looks good or beautiful, therefore you can more deeply analyze art. This view was education in the ways that the text would have a hard time discussing. The text is able to completely cover topics like symmetry rationalism, shape, line, order and other themes but not psychological. This is helpful in the definitions of art nad how we view it, this video can further deepen the discussions of the art and what it means according to the time period.
The CNN article successfully adds to the explanation of beauty and creativity that is in the text. The text focuses a lot on actual paintings from different cultures and time periods. The information from the article justifies the breaking down of how the text explains certain artists have used techniques to represent different things. The article also talks about the brain and neuroscience, this is the backdrop for the basic understanding of the relationship of art to humans. The article and the text talk about line, shape and color the only difference is that the article is more science based.
5. What is your opinion of the films and article? How do they add depth to understanding of the topics in your reading in the text?
The film CARTA definitely provides information from the very beginning if human existence and the effects that follow. I enjoyed the discussion of emotions and how this differentiates us as species. Visual imagery allows emotional input or impact on others. This was interesting to learn about and go into depth, it isn't commonly discussed in art.I really enjoyed Ramachandran’s portion of the CARTA video. The way that he discussed butterflies and how it relates to human interpretation of beauty was so interesting. Culture is something that intrigues me, this is an aspect that was fascinating. His discussion of ascetics and the value is holds in cultures is different according to their surrounding natural environment. It was very interesting how he discussed elements in Indian art towards the end of the video, wrapping up his main point of aesthetics in diverse parts of the world.
The philosophy on aesthetics was very intriguing and a diverse way of viewing beauty. I thought it was interesting how definitions and viewpoints of people had changed throughout periods of time. I thought that the different theories of people made me understand why certain movements in art meant what they did. It was extremely factual, which was helpful there were a lot of points that I didn't know about. I enjoyed the philosophers throughout time and the impact that they had on society, or how they viewed beauty or aesthetics in art.
I enjoyed reading the CNN article, it provides information that wasn't discussed in the text. It gave not only factual information but then added on knowledge that I did not know about. I think it was really interesting when they talked about Zeki’s exhibition and the use of color as well as how humans look for representation in art even though it is abstract. Understanding not only the actually work of art and what the artist painted, these sources give an understanding to what our brains are processing. This also makes one aware of color, line and other elements that can be used in the discussion of art.
Comments
Post a Comment