Category — Site Authors

http://www.paulgraham.ca/albums/Random-Pictures-ALBUM-2/clean_kitchen.jpg

Often, the walls and counters are splattered with tomato sauce, the microwave is covered in mysterious substances, and both the sinks are clogged with an odd assortment of meat and noodles at the bottom and gray material floating to the top.  That is the average condition of the kitchen at Ludlow.

However, there are times when the kitchen is spotless or at least there is enough clean counter space and one unclogged sink.  I boil water in the kitchen for my French-press made coffee; it is always empty and usually just cleaned.  I usually cook meals in the kitchen, and usually find some space.  But most interesting in the kitchen is seeing who actually uses it.

It is the one kitchen for eighteen floors of residents, and there is usually not a wait.  There are some regulars that I always see, first-time cooks, the occasional ramen cooker, and the Brita fillers.  There’s the girl from Baruch that I thought was from SVA whose family lives in the Dominican Republic, the awkward King’s College kid who owns all of the appliances and has the largest trunk of kitchen supplies, the other awkward King’s kid who makes cheesy baked chili and other boxed meals, and the Baruch guy that makes breaded chicken all the time.

It’s interesting to meet different people in the dorm’s kitchens that cook different cuisines and come from across the United States.  We all at least share one thing: a big mess.

Seeing George Maciunas’ diet presented in a piece representative of the Fluxus exhibit begged the question, “what is art?”  It shows how we change our perceptions of art, aesthetics, and beauty over time, even if individuals don’t consider it art.  The organization of the food containers looked like panels of printed paper from afar and not just piles of food.  Whether to consider this art is subjective, but the piece is nonetheless revealing of his life and his perceptions.

Jackson Pollock

http://www.fotos.org/galeria/data/551/Jackson-Pollock-Untitled-1950-MOMA-NYC.jpg

From the widely known works of Jackson Pollack and De Kooning to the lesser known Rothko and Hofmann, the Abstract Expressionism exhibit reflects the post-World War II art movement, a movement challenging the way people perceived art and how to portray figures and landscapes.  Pollack’s work has such interesting texture, certain color, and certain movement that gives it a certain mood.  To me all of his works basically look the same yet produce a slightly different mood with varying color choices.

Pousette-Dart

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4154/5224011777_7a73a47e73.jpg

The artist that I enjoyed the most was Pousette-Dart whose pieces were colorful and intricate, conveying a certain feeling and distorting shapes in some chosen curves and lines.  Many look like machines, reminiscent of Salvador Dali’s surrealism, and are abstract yet provide a perception of depth and layers.

Then there were the sculptures that looked strange and unseemly, yet were supposed to be the artist’s reflection of a body or an object.  There was a room that was mostly blocks of color with a line or two on the canvas; one “piece of art” appeared to be a wooden stick painted black and tacked on to the wall.  It is easy to say that a five year old could have done some of these, and I concur with that sentiment for art like the stick.  Yet the lines or colors are probably chosen purposefully, and observing them up close helps one appreciate the texture in the canvas.  But that stick just seemed to have drips of paint.

The “On Line: Drawing Through the Twentieth Century” exhibit produced some interesting three dimensional works as well as interesting two dimensional works all playing with form and space.  Incorporating video and modern dance, this exhibit captured both still and moving image, the most questionable of which was the nude, tortured looking woman who attached herself to a harness of paper covered walls, and drew on them.  Perhaps it is the method that makes the art, and the end piece may be called art, but that simply doesn’t make it enjoyable or thought provoking.

I didn’t do it on purpose.  In class, when mentioned that I forgot to give the link to a photograph, my heart dropped, especially when I heard that the photographer would be coming to speak to us.  So my apologies to Sara Krulwich for not double-checking that I did not credit the photograph.  Ms. Krulwich appeared to have a masked anger when addressing this, saying only that people shouldn’t steal photographs.  I was slightly miffed by this, as I did not copy it with intent.

However, I understand this sentiment to be due to the pride Krulwich takes in her work.  She broke barriers in photography for women at the University of Michigan, and her bold personality remains today.  Her passion for photography was clear and that is respectable.

Most memorable is her advice to “not be afraid” and to “get close.”  To really capture something you have to get close.  Her personality and tenaciousness lead to her post at the New York Times.  It is interesting that she takes so many images a day at the performances she attends, only to have one or two picked.  Having to capture moments that are already crafted seems irrelevant to her advice about getting close.  But as her photograph of Richard Price (in my Price blog post) shows, she follows her own advice.

http://www.treehouseproductionsnyc.com/photos/lang%205.jpg

http://thefastertimes.com/newyorktheater/files/2010/03/scottsboroboys2.jpg

Jim Crow representation

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/86/Jimcrow.jpg

In 1932, Rosa Parks married Raymond Parks and the two join the campaign to save the Scottsboro Boys; in 1955, she was arrested for refusing to move on the bus.  Her peaceful resistance on that night is widely taught, but the Scottsboro Boys are hardly as much of a household name.  In a rather bright, humorous (though darkly humorous) manner, “The Scottsboro Boys” tells an important and regrettable case in history.  Told in the minstrel tradition, “Scottsboro” is at once funny, offensive, and a reminder of the past.  A colorful set, vivid costuming, a simple but intricate set, an incredibly engaging, talented cast, the political undertones, and to some extent the offensiveness of the play made “Scottsboro” captivating and entertaining yet with a bit of bite.

The presentation of the story of a rape case between a white woman’s claim, black defendants, and a white jury in the South is reminiscent of Harper Lee’s To Kill A Mockingbird, yet the mocking minstrelsy, vivid color, and bright lighting kept the play feeling modern.  The simple set with interlocking chairs representing the prison, the train, and various other sets was genius.  I especially liked the train scene where the tambourines were used as the wheels of the train, and the actors made it look like the train was moving.  So many people moving on such a makeshift structure made it so surprising that is was so sturdy when actors jumped on top of it.

The song in that scene was so catchy; “commencing in Chattanooga…” is still playing in my head.  Yet the bubbly tunes come in sharp contrast to the subject matter.  Cheery music including tambourines, memorable beats, and the occasional beat from tap dancing provided an irresistible upbeat feeling.  The contrast was most distinct during the electric chair scene; although the chair signifies imminent death, the movement and staging seemed to suggest nothing of the sort.

The most memorable performance came from Joshua Henry who portrayed Haywood Patterson who in the play was put into solitary confinement and died in prison.  He provided strength and dynamism in his dance movement, acting, voice, and simple presence.  Other memorable performances include the youngest in the cast, Julius Thomas III, who portrayed Roy Wright, Colman Domingo and Forrest McClendon who portrayed the offensively funny and changing roles of Mr. Bones and Mr. Tambo.

It is a shame that the show is closing on December 12 at a 5 million dollar loss, though the producers contend it is due to the economy more than the protests.  “The Scottsboro Boys” keeps present episodes in our history that we might like to forget, but question society today.  Although spoken by the interlocutor (played by John Cullum), his message resonates: “Gentlemen, be seated.”

chiqclicks.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/10-07-01-Sara-Krulwich

During Sara Krulwich’s visit, she talked about many things in her life and how they shaped what she became today. From her experience on the Michigan Wolverine football field until today, photography and the way she approached it has been a key factor in her success throughout her career. Towards the end of her talk in our class, she started giving out advice on how to shoot pictures well and how it is most affective. One point she really seemed to emphasize on was to not be afraid to get close to our subject. When you get up close and personal to what you are trying to shoot, the overall quality and meaning of the photo comes to life. Every step closer to the subject makes a difference, and that was what her career thrived on.

Sara Krulwich was never worried about getting too close or too personal with what she wanted to capture. She didn’t conform to the “rules” or the “norm” of society. She did what she wanted to do, in a non-arrogant way though. She simply wanted what was fair and she stood up for that. In 1968, she became the first woman photographer for “The Michigan Daily.” Her freshmen year, while working for the paper, she did the unthinkable. She went on to a man’s ground! She stepped foot on to a football field!! She did what only men….and dogs were allowed to do and it was controversial. She was there to take picture of the game for the paper but security was refusing to let her remain on the field. But since Krulwich is very courageous and determined person, she matched the security guards relentlessness. She refused to get off the field ans said they would have to physically remove her. That moment changed her life. She ended up being able to stay, take picture, and change the face of photography forever. It was that moment where she realized she wanted to be a photojournalist.

Sara Krulwich was never shaken by the animosity she faced being a female photographer. Her fearlessness is what got her into photography and helped her remain there. “Don’t be afraid to get close” is what really stuck with me from her talk to us because you can tell how real that statement was and how she is saying that out of experience. It is that dedication that makes her one of the top female photographers of her field, and our time.

Sarah Krulwich’s career is a great example of how, even through adversity, one can achieve something remarkably significant and completely unexpected. After picking up a book on how to develop photographs, Sarah Krulwich became the first female photographer on her college newspaper. She was not particularly interested in photography, but she had a camera, and they needed a photographer.

By her second year on the newspaper she gained enough seniority to have calim an exclusive pass that let her photograph on the actual sidelines of the football field. The problem was that it was also against school policy to allow women on the football field. After a tense encounter with the men on the field she skyrocketed to fame for refusing to back down.

From then on her life has revolved around photojournalism and a handful of moments where she was the first female photographer to do something. She started off taking photographs of sporting events and eventually gained enough recognition to take photos of the New York Times. Even though she says she did not know anything about the sports themselves she was able to learn on the job by timing her shots split seconds before things happened, firing off as many shots as she could. In this way she was able to get the shots she needed and solidify her place in the world of photojournalism. She also explains how she was able to get quirky, or interesting photographs because of the fact that she did not know how the sports were played and therefore was positioned to take certain photographs that other sport photographers missed. This made her photographs stand out from the rest of the crowd. She explained how most people around her treated her poorly because she was a woman taking photographs of sporting events, but this did not deter her from advancing her career.

She eventually went from the first woman photographer in her college newspaper to one of the first photographers ever to gain inside access on a consistent basis to New York’s theater, opera, and dance. Her experience as a sports photographer allowed her to get the shots that no one else could. She would take pictures of active and energetic moments during performances; instead of the happy still shots that were usually sent out to newspapers before a production opened.

Sometimes the smallest things, like a little book on photography, can change someone’s entire life.

Unique. Innovative. Controversial. MoMA is home to countless artworks, many of which embody all three characteristics. George Macuinas’s display, One Year, certainly falls into that category. “It just looks like a supermarket,” I heard someone comment when we first walked in. I, on the other hand, saw something aesthetically deliberate about the work. When I witnessed the empty food containers stacked in rows against the wall, I quickly noticed the patterns of colors and shapes they created. It was a difficult piece to interpret, if it had any meaning at all, but I could feel that the artist had carefully and intentionally arranged all the boxes, cartons, lids and plastics to be just where they were.

Other rooms showcased incredibly simple works that were hard to accept as masterpieces. Lee Krasner’s Number Three, for instance, was a canvas which displayed a random series of soft-colored red, blue and beige vertical stripes. I found the combination of colors appealing, but its lack of intricacies bothered me. I wondered how this could be displayed in such a renowned museum, when it appeared as if any person could have created it. When I encountered Barnett Newman’s Onement, 1, I was again struck with the same question. This time, the piece was a brown painted canvas with a single pumpkin-orange stroke running through the middle. “It’s modern,” some claim; “it’s just a line,” others might protest. Personally, I found myself leaning towards the latter.

As I continued to wander through the museum, I caught sight of a painting that completely stole my attention. From a distance, I could only see an irregular green shape surrounded by a dark blue background. When I approached the piece, I finally realized what the unidentified green mass on the canvas was: a slime monster! I stared at the painting for a while, then glanced at its white description box, only to discover that William Baziote had intended for the green “monster” to be a dwarf. As pointed out by my classmate, Sara, art can be exciting when one makes sense of it, but can also be disappointing if one becomes disillusioned with the artist’s actual idea.

On the other hand, I was shocked with Hedda Sterne’s painting for the opposite reason. When I first looked at New York, VIII, I felt as if the piece was screaming, “New York City!” After my experience with Baziote’s Dwarf, however, I managed to convince myself that I was wrong, and attempted to re-evaluate the artwork. After thirty seconds or so, I gave up and looked at the caption provided. I was stunned by the title, for it showed that the painting was in fact a portrayal of the city. I could not imagine how Sterne accomplished conveying such a clear vision without the use of lines and definite shapes. Her piece was abstract in appearance, but rather direct in the portrayal of her idea. Even days after having seen this painting, I am still dumbfounded by Sterne’s artistic talent, which radiates from this piece.

Through my visit to MoMA, I discovered that whether one is trying to define it or interpret it, art, as subjective as it is, presents a viewer with many challenges. In the end, however, I believe that art is really whatever you want it to be. An artist may present a work that is plain or elaborate, tiny or massive, predesigned or spontaneous; no matter what, it is up to the observer to decide whether a piece’s sensory impact, be it visual or auditory, is enough to make it art.

Spotted: Sara Krulwich, New York Times photographer, guest of honor at Baruch.  In her classroom visit, she outlined the progression of women’s rights through the lens of a female photographer. In an exceptionally well-delivered performance, she moved swiftly through various stages of her development. She showed us that what began as a passionate hobby as a college newspaper photographer ended up being a full-time job. Now a much sought-after photographer for the New York Times, her gender is hardly an obstacle.

Krulwich delivers a certain comic relief to the sad reality of the male chauvinism that existed in the 1960s. She says of her alma mater, University of Michigan, “No women, children or dogs allowed on the field.” It sounds like a joke, but it is far from comical. In fact, “there were no women in the marching band; no women cheerleaders; no women security guards.”

I know Sara Krulwich is coveted photographer, but her storytelling skills are also pretty impressive. She describes the fate from which she was saved when she was a novice photographer in college.  In her sophomore year, with a certain measure of defiance, she stepped on to the football field, camera in tow, ready to cover the game. The male security guards were about to physically remove her from the field, but decided not to make a huge commotion once the game was in session. That she remained on the football field was a direct lead for her to become a star in the photojournalism field. By doing so, her civil disobedience made a huge statement in women’s “power” in the workforce.

The other side of her presentation was more technical, discussing how she managed to buy camera equipment for very cheap in second-hand shops. Sara Krulwich struck me as exceptionally real person, a hard worker. She knew her limits and she fought them to get what she wanted. She had a goal and she was determined to reach it. Neither financial concerns nor sexual discrimination stopped her. She proved that nothing could stand in the way of motivation. Her presentation left us empowered. Krulwich shouts YES-WE-CAN! to women in every field.

Chris Hondros/Getty Images

Times square is known as the center where tourists from all over the world come and splurge in the delicious delicacies that New York City has to offer. To that extent, it is no surprise how well the mta transportation system is doing, despite its massive debt and rumors of fare hikes. Tourists often use these transportation systems, buses, ferries, subways, in order to get from one famous landmark, to a local delicatessen steeped in rich history.

The day started out like any other, with our IDC Arts class going to the Museum of Modern Art on a brisk day. It was quite a decent trip, and I had learned a lot about what Art is. What is Art? Well let’s just leave that discussion off to another day. After our professor-led tour was done for the day, everyone decided to go there separate days. I decided to leave with the bunch of people, who wanted to get food. The moment we left MOMA, one of my peers chose Halal food for lunch, and the rest of us followed. Far off in the distance, you could see a bustling Halal stand, with the employees of the place dressed in matching attire. When we were close enough, we could see the line of people waiting to get Halal food, and trust me, the wait was unbearable.

We had all eaten, and the food was amazing, considering I had a completely empty stomach when it was lunchtime. After all the food was consumed, we got on our way and took the subway back to Baruch College. However, we chose the wrong subway train to take at first, and ended up having to switch trains at Times Square. While in the Times Square station, a Chinese woman, from the southwestern part, asked me for directions to go to Herald Square in order to meet up with her friend. Now it would have been completely normal for us if we both had communicated with the English language. However, this was not the case. Instead, I was required to speak Chinese, something new to me because I haven’t spoken Chinese in so long. Luckily I was able to tell the woman where to go, and we were able to chitchat for a bit as we walked in the same direction. She told me how she just arrived in America a few days ago, and was looking for a friend to have lunch with.

She went her way, and I went back to join my friends after helping out the Chinese woman. For the rest of the day, there was a smile on my face, and I knew I had done something culturally astounding and productive the moment the woman had considered asking me for directions. Only in New York City…

1940s: As wounds were still healing in Europe, New York City jumped on the opportunity to steal the spotlight. The result? Abstract expressionism. Abstract expressionists in NYC ushered in modern art into the post-WWII era.

Much of modern art is just simple ideas that one person decided to display. Although some may peg it as a ridiculous extortion of the definition of “art,” anything may be considered art so long as it expresses some creative skill or imagination. Since new forms of art are modern in their use of color, texture, design, and subject, they are the manifestation the imagination of modern man. The MoMA Abstract Expressionism exhibit showcases the abstract art of the 1940s, the progeny of New York City’s then-chicest artists. These  artists brought new ideas to the artist’s palette, shifting the focus from more conventional to more modern.

In Jackson Pollock’s “drip painting” pieces, he throws paint all over the canvas. What makes this art? He creates texture by embedding objects in the surface of layers of paint. Actually, the paintings reminded me of ice cream flavors. His “No. 1A” (1948) as cookies ‘n cream, and “Full Fathom Five” as mint chocolate chip. An even bigger cookies ‘n cream is his “One: Number 31” (1950).

“No. 1A” (1948) Jackson Pollock

"Full Fathom Five" (1950) Jackson Pollock

Texture was very important to William de Koonig, as apparent in his “A Tree in Naples,” in which he creates a certain depth unusual for a 2-D painting. What makes this art? The purposeful inversion of color to expand the color of nature. In doing so, it produces visual enthusiasm for the viewer. I noticed a similarity between Saul Leiter’s photos and de Koonig’s “Valentine.” Hedda Stein’s use of reflections and blurriness capture the New York City scene in “New York, VIII” (1954) was also oddly familiar to me. Then I remembered reading that abstract paintings were Leiter’s stated muse for his photography.

"Valentine" (1947) Willem de Koonig

Ad Reinhart introduced a new art form, in which he experiments with different shades of color. The different shades of black are divided into sections of thirds, and become visible only after prolonged viewing. His “Abstract Painting” (1957) is simply a painting of three blocks of black, lined up next to one another. It is a simple yet brilliant piece of art. What makes this art? It broadens the idea of what color is.

The new art is all about experimentation. Arshile Gorky plays with shapes, Ad Reinhart with shades of color, Jackson Pollock with lines, Willem de Koonig with color and texture, Mark Rothko with layers. Together, they create an expanded register of talent, eye candy for museumgoers. To that end, MoMA ought to be renamed Musem for the Chic. The exhibits are bright, vivid, colorful, fun. Chic. The people are even chic. Take a look at the people walking through the galleries. Lots of hip, well-dressed Barbies with their Kens. A bunch of people who think abstract expressionism is “rad.”