The Politics of Art & Authenticity

I’ll be in class on Thursday, November 29th to give a short iMovie tutorial. If you have any other programs (e.g., garageband) you’d like me to talk about, please let me know by Tuesday, November 27th.

Also, feel free to email me any questions anytime: amanda.favia@macaulay.cuny.edu

I do apologize for not attending the Sunday I was suppose to see Wild With Happy, but I did take the time out this weekend to watch it with my friend. Of course, he was not happy that I was dragging him out on a Saturday night to watch an off-broadway play, but I told him that if he did I’ll buy him food (bribery always works). After the show, his reaction was priceless. I loved it and I was so happy I went to see this, and he just couldn’t stop talking about how amazing it is. He basically told me I had to go see another off-broadway play with him.

Anyways, this play was my favorite out of all the things we have done in this class. It was so creative. I thought House/Divided was creative, but this beats it. The fact that they were using coffins as a prop. The coffins would change into a park bench, a car, and a closet was unexpected. Plus, I never thought you can use coffins in an other form other than for funerals. I don’t look at coffins as something to use as an example of simple things such as a park bench, so I thought that was truly interesting how the coffins were being used.

The actors in the play were just amazing because I felt like they were trying to connect to the audience. The emotions they put behind their lines were as if they were speaking to me, and only me. I felt so connected to the actors through the whole play. I cannot stress how much I loved Aunt Glo. To be honest, I feel like I connect with Aunt Glo. The fact that she was so loud and obnoxious. At work, I’m known to be loud and obnoxious, just by the way I laugh and to see Aunt Glo with her loud and obnoxious personality, just reminded me of being at work and laughing uncontrollably loud through the aisles. Although her personality matches mine, we definitely do not have the same fashion sense. I’m sorry but that cheetah print suit has got to go.

The ending just blew me away. I grew up around Disney and I cannot stress how much I love Disney. Anything with Disney World will win my heart, so this play won my heart. Disney World is amazing and that is the best ending I could ever ask for.

After seeing the Barnard Project dance performance I was very confused. I didn’t realize that workout warm-ups and rolling on the floor was considered dance.  And what was going on with the girl putting tape on the ground.  I’m one who tries to find the good in everything, but it was very difficult to find meaning in the performance.  I think the dancers did a fantastic job and worked very hard. There were times when you could hear how heavy they were breathing, and they had to consistently dance for several minutes, which can be very exhausting.

I’m not sure if there was a reoccurring theme in each performance, but I think it was basically telling people to question what they believe to be true.  Most people think that dancing is usually a ballet or some interpretive dance, but this was completely different.  I wouldn’t even know how to explain it.  I wouldn’t call it dance but I think it was a form of art.  It was almost like a hipster dance; one of those random things that hipsters would think had so much deep meaning and feeling in it.

Some parts were very strange, especially the second performance when the girls were all saying different names and then started shaking their heads like something from The Grudge.  It was just very creepy and I thought I was going to get nightmares.  Luckily I didn’t.

I did enjoy the last performance though.  There was a lot of constant movement, and the music was pretty entertaining.  What I really enjoyed about it though was how the lighting made these large shadows on the back wall.  I really appreciated the dancers movements when I saw the shadows of them.  I felt like I could feel their emotion so much more when I just saw their movements, and nothing else.  So maybe the expression wasn’t to be found in just watching the dancing, but finding another way to see expression in dance movements.  I found it in shadows, someone else might have found it in stillness, and some might have even found it in tape.  All that matters is that everyone finds the expression in something.

http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2012/11/17/arts/17BARNARD.html

Last Thursday I went to The Museum of Modern Art to see The Scream, by artist Edvard Munch.  I was very excited for this day to come, because I know how world-renowned the painting is and it has been used in so many television shows and films.  It was almost disappointing when I realized it wasn’t the oil-painting version that many people know.  Instead I viewed the pastel version, which almost looked like a 5 year old had drawn it.  How was it that this pastel drawing was next to all these other amazing artists like Picasso and Vincent Van Gogh? I was surprised that people would consider this art.

But then I looked at it a second time.  I saw all the rough and distinct marks that Munch had made, and it shows the confidence in his work.  It also creates more emotion when you see the hard strokes of the lines.  It made me realize that sometimes the best art can be in the simplest of forms, but still convey a strong idea.  The saying “less is more” is actually very true.

http://www.sothebys.com/content/sothebys/en/sales-series/2012/impressionist-modern-art-evening-sale/overview/_jcr_content/leftpar/image.img.jpg/1329735207815.jpg

The other exhibit that I really enjoyed was the photography.  I have worked with film photography for a few years, so I understand the time and effort that goes into some of the photos.  It isn’t just pressing down the shutter and printing out the photo.  It’s making sure the lighting is just right, and the exposure is on the correct setting or else the photo won’t be accurate.

I really liked Birdhead’s work, which was a collaboration between Ji Weiyu and Song Tao, all about urban life in Shanghai.  What I really enjoyed about it was it reminded me of the film work that I used to do.  Each photo had a good composition, but together formed a strong piece of work.  I also couldn’t get over how large some of the photos were.  The technical process to make a large print is very difficult and a large tub is needed to develop the photo.  Overall, I was very impressed.

My trip to MOMA left me wanting to see more of the museum, and I will definitely be going back soon!

I am sorry that I got to the play late. Thankfully, they still let me into the play. However, I had to wait until the next scene to enter. At least, I got a seat close to the stage. It was a great seat except for the fact that there was this lady’s big hair in my way and I constantly kept on moving around to see the stage.

The play was very humorous and entertaining. At first I didn’t understand what was going on, but I knew that the main character was experiencing a death in the family. I actually got confused in the second scene because the same actress played different people. I didn’t realize that she was a different character until the name of the character was said.

I did enjoy the over-the-top acting by Aunt Glo. I thought the valor cheetah print suit with the fanny pack perfectly fit her persona. She is loud and obnoxious, just like her outfit. Every single character acted as though they wanted the audience to be part of the scene and stressed each word and emotion. We get to see the actors in a more up-close and intimate level. The fast-paced conversations and witty banters made the play so much more enjoyable.

There multiple uses of different types of media from the acting to the projections for the background. The video of Gil’s mother as Cinderella was quite cute. The use of the map for the car chase along with the sounds of the car crash when Aunt Glo drove added more to the story. The transition into each scene was interesting. I would have never expected that the coffins were able to transform into a closet, a car seat and a park bench. Mo, Gil’s friend, opened the coffins in a sexy, hilarious way. It was as if he was trying to seduce the audience with his winks and sashaying while transitioning the scenes.

The playwright cleverly incorporated a serious issue of coping with death with Cinderella, as a symbol hope of dreams and happiness. In Cinderella’s room, Gil had a change of heart on how he viewed life. At the end of the play, I couldn’t help but awe at the fact that Gil got his shoe back from his Prince Charming, Terry. This has been one of my favorite plays that I have seen so far. I was glad to know that the play was going to continue on for another week because I would give others a chance to view this amazing play.

http://d3rm69wky8vagu.cloudfront.net/photos/large/3.179564.jpg

I always had the notion that the NY Hall of Science was just for kids. That could possibly be because I was brought there numerous times by each of my schools right up until fifth grade when we slept over at the museum.  Maybe it was because I only ever saw younger children there.  However because of such reasoning, after fifth grade I just stopped going.

Up until I got my Macaulay passport I had almost completely forgotten about the museum.  When I first say the NY Hall of Science listed on the back of the card I thought they were insane to put it there.  No college student would go there, it was for kids.  Yet my inner child screamed, “Choose that one!”  Somehow I wound up giving in.

Upon entering I remembered one important detail my memories had left out.  Yes, every exhibit was fun and seemed like a toy, however I didn’t understand most of them as a kid.  I either didn’t understand the exhibits or made no attempt to try to because I wasn’t interested in science at all.  The museum was completely new to me again, filled with information ready to be learned while playing with the devices set out to help children understand scientific concepts.

All explanations seemed to be dumbed down as much as possible.  I was amazed at how much I had learned in the seven years since I last visited.  Despite many differences in the layout of the museum and quite a few new displays, I was glad to see the same exhibits there that I remembered from the last time I had gone.  It felt like going home again after a long absence.

There were my favorites: the shadow room, the optical illusion room, the walls which cast your shadows in assorted colors, and the bubble wall.  I still cannot tell anyone the dynamics of these or why they’re even there besides to look interesting.  They seemed more like works of art or machines made to create art.

I hope they continue to add and improve upon new exhibits because going to a museum like this creates a memory that stays with a child for a lifetime.   The Hall of Science offers more than just a fun house or artistic designs meant to represent some sort of model.  It is also a place of learning where anyone and everyone is welcome.

I am not big on dance.  It is an art form I find hard to get into unless there’s interesting music, music that’s upbeat that will keep me awake, or something always going on.  Even an interesting set might keep my interest.  As for The Barnard Fall Project, I was very unsure about what was going on.

Going from dance to dance I was very confused.  There was music and then there was no music.  The movements were hectic and then there was no movement.  There was silence and then there were small bursts of words and a little speaking.  It seemed more than just unorganized.  At first it felt as if the dancers were just using random movements.  What was with them saying “swim” and “and”?  I could not wrap my mind around it.

In order to make sense out of it all I created a small storyline for the entire thing, despite knowing the same dancers were not used for every dance.  During the first dance the dancers kept saying “swim”, the stage was a tint of blue and their movements mimicked that of swimmers in the water.  This, I decided, was a swim scene or some sort of swim class.

The second was of four girls in dresses.  Toward the end of this second dance the four girls are walking in lines childishly skipping each other to be in front.   Then they sat down and pulled their hair out of their ponytails, toyed with their hair, and then sit beside one another.  This made me think of four sisters or even friends finishing their day and getting ready for bed at a sleepover of sorts.

The third dance was a little strange.  The dancers were lying down and in positions that made it seem as if they were sleeping.  They even brought out a blanket at one point.  Also, the stage was somewhat darker at first to make it seem as if it were night.  As two dancers came out and slowly started moving I felt this showed the movement of time for after a while the lights grew brighter on stage as if morning had come.  That was when those who had been sleeping finally got up and joined the dancing.

Then finally the final dance where the dancers danced in radical ways across the stage, this somehow made me think of school.  At first they started in a group with one person at the front, like a teacher or some sort of instructor.  Throughout this dance they continued to follow each other, as if learning from one another.  In other words this recital went through an afternoon, night, morning, and day of a person.

My favorite dance had to be the final one that seemed to have the most energy.  I like how they set up lights in front to cast shadows of the dancers against the back wall as they leaped across the stage, twirled, and danced in unusual patterns.  I also liked when they lined up in rows of three.  The first row moved fast while as the rows went back the dancers moved slower and slower.  Then the dancers spun and reversed the effect, the dancers in front moved slowest while those in back moved fastest.

Overall this was an interesting recital.  After reading the dancer’s bios did I actually get a clue as to what was going on.  What went on were types of dances I have never seen nor heard of before.  Most likely I probably would not have gone to see it if it were just me but I am glad I was able to experience it.

Source

http://newyorklivearts.org/media/gallery/barnard_web3-1313165188.jpg

Museums are of my favorite places to visit.  What one finds in a museum is immortal.  The artifacts seem to transcend the ages.  Wen I see a piece of art I either like it or I don’t.  There seems to never be any in between.

There were many unique pieces in this museum.  The ones that are still fresh in my mind are “The Scream”, “Starry Night”, and Frieda Kahlo‘s painting. These three timeless pieces are extremely famous.  They are shown in textbooks, have parodies made of them, and are often the first things that come to mind when one of these painters are mentioned.

When I saw “Scream”, the first thing I thought of was an article I had recently read about it and all the parody paintings that had been placed around the article.  Aside from this thought, I genuinely did not feel any genuine excitement over seeing this piece of art.  I feel as if the media has desensitized me to it.  Having seen it in movies, cartoons, replicas, I felt as if I were just seeing another.

However it felt as if none of the other paintings compared to “Scream” and the other famous works by the renowned artists.  You only saw crowds gathered around the more recognized ones which, I suppose, is understandable to some extent.

The photography section seemed short though it was filled with tons of pieces.  I have never been very interested in photography so I was unfamiliar with most of the artists.  I regarded many as interesting and was left wondering about others.  There was one piece that made me wonder how it got into the museum.  It was in a large glass display case against the wall.  If I remember correctly the background was cut in half, the top was white and the bottom was gray.  At the very center were two pictures, one of a bright sky blue sky and another of a darker colored sky.  I’m going from memory however it was plain, ordinary.  It felt like anyone could have done it.

What stood out to me most in the photography section could be found in the part we viewed before the exit.  There was the face of a man who seemed like he was screaming, in some sort of pain, or just so moved by something.  His face was scrunched up, one could see his age lines.  This one photograph portrayed so much emotion yet it was black and white and quite possibly taken years ago.  The feeling I got from this one photo made me think that a picture really is worth a thousand words.

Source:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f4/The_Scream.jpg/220px-The_Scream.jpg

I was really pleased with the art I saw at the MoMA, as it redefined the way I typically think of modern art. It was more unconventional than traditional art, but not ridiculous or childish in any way.  A great example of how purposeful and effective modern art can be is Edvard Munch’s “The Scream.” This painting was done around the turn of the 20th century, and it was meant to symblize the confusion and unsettled feeling of many people during that time. To me, “The Scream” is such a powerful image because it manages to capture not a person or an event, but a nameless feeling. The figure who is screaming does not look human, because he’s not. He is the personification of an emotional experience. Many of us have had the feeling of being stifled and not knowing where to turn. It seems like the only way we can manage is to let our feelings out into the open, so they don’t weigh us down any longer. The two men on the bridge seem rather purposeless and are mindlessly gazing off into the distance, not knowing what to do with themselves. Though they look to be in control of themselves, the silently screaming figure shows what they are really feeling inside. What many people feel inside. The chasm between how we feel and how we appear is often a product of the need to appear “normal” and in control at all times.

My favorite piece of artwork at the MoMA was in the photography exhibit. Photography is perhaps the most modern of all modern art, as it uses technology (like photoshop) which was unimaginable even 30 years ago. From what I saw, it seemed that most the photos were “tampered with” and not something that could’ve been created that long ago. Photography is just as legitimate as other forms of art, because the artist is still using a medium to create feelings and reactions in viewers. Though I didn’t connect with everything I saw (ahem…I’m talking to you: photo of hand with dead bug on it, next to plant), my favorite piece was a collage of small photos of the same location as it turned from night to day

I was fully satisfied with our trip to the museum during class time, so I nearly forgot about the dance planned for later that evening…

Let me start off by formally announcing, now that I have an actual experience to back me up, that modern dance is not my cup of tea. Though I recognize the athleticism and skill that the dancers obviously have, that doesn’t mean that that they were, in fact, dancing. I’m not sure of the formal definition of dance, but I believe that unsynchronized movements, without musical accompaniment, should not be falsely advertised as a dance. Though I was pleased to see dancers with all different body types, I still did not enjoy their moves or the incomprehensible stories they were ostensibly trying to tell. Call me a traditionalist, but it should not have been called a dance, and that’s that. I will never subject myself to another modern dance, if I can help it. I’d rather see seven more operas. I also felt bad for the dancers, because I heard several people laughing at the things they were doing onstage. People usually laugh at the unexpected, and because I assume most people were expecting some dancing to be involved, it’s no wonder that they found it humorous.

While modern art is a brilliant spin on art , modern dance is not dancing. Ballet next time, anyone?

About a week ago I went to see Wild With Happy, which was written by and starred Colman Domingo, and I left the show amazed.  The set design was one of the most creative sets I have ever seen in a show, with coffins turning into everything from park benches to car seats.  I commend the set designers for all their hard work and creativity they put into making those props.  It definitely added to the humor of the play, and helped illustrate the irony that was seen throughout the entire play.

http://cdn.newsday.com/polopoly_fs/1.4145488.1351027970!/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/display_600/image.jpg

Wild With Happy was successful in making people happy that’s for sure.  I don’t think five minutes went by without someone laughing at a line one of the actors said, or an action that they performed.  They took a very sad scenario of a son mourning the death of his mother, and did everything to make it as happy and joyful as possible.  If there were tears, they were probably tears from laughing so hard that people began to cry.

For Domingo’s first play I would say he’s off to a good start.  There were some points that I would say needed improvement, just with the flow between scenes to make the entire play cohesive.  At times I was confused with what was a flashback and then what was actually going on.  Some of the scenes didn’t seem to have a constant flow, which sometimes made me wonder how much time passed between each scene.  I also think the opening scene should have been a little less chaotic just so I would’ve been able to understand that his mother died.  But at the same time, it is this craziness that makes Domingo an auteur in his play-writing skills and I wouldn’t be surprised if he had a similar style in other shows.  Even though the ending was a little cheesy, with Disney World and all, it still had a great meaning and really brought the entire play together.  I wouldn’t say that Wild With Happy is my style of show, but I did enjoy it and left the theatre with a smile.