CUNY Macaulay Honors College at Baruch College/Professor Bernstein

http://gaylasmagazine.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341cd7a653ef0120a67b93d9970c-800wi

Who She Is

Music seems to be a passion that is able to wind effortlessly into the lives—and life goals—of many. Professor Gwen D’Amico, a music professor at 4 of the CUNY Schools (Brooklyn, City, Lehman, and Baruch), is no exception.

Music was a large part of Professor D’Amico’s life at a very young age. Her parents were avid lovers of music, and they always tried to surround her with all forms of it—they brought her to her first opera at the age of six. Although she wasn’t in love with the classical forms at that age, she began to take voice lessons at only eight years old. From that point on, music was always a part of her life. Music also stayed with her long into college. Although she did nothing professional with opera singing in the long term, she tried her luck with various productions—she even did a wedding gig once in a while. Still, despite her departure from this career path, it has remained a resounding passion within her.

http://nashvillesongevaluation.com/nashville-pictures/MERCURY_RECORDS_EDTED_Img0479.JPG

After majoring in music business in a small college in Pennsylvania, Professor D’Amico pursued a job in the music industry, at Mercury Records. Here, she became closer than ever to realizing what her next goal would be. Her work with music contracts peaked her interest in the legal aspect of the music industry, and she decided that she wanted to become an entertainment lawyer. She wanted to make a difference within the industry—to make it even better than she already expected it to be. However, after a while, she decided that although she loved the field, she didn’t want to become a lawyer—the industry was often more corrupt than fun during the 1970s and 1980s. “It was—and still is—a very male specific industry. I didn’t notice at first that all of the administrators were old men with cigars, and all the secretaries were matching blondes,” she told me. Professor D’Amico started to see the distortion of the industry, and even though she admitted that “no commerce is pure,” she saw that the music industry just wasn’t about the music anymore. “Once you begin to sell any art, it is no longer about the art—sadly, it’s all about the money,” she told me. She soon moved on from contract work to radio promotion in an effort to free herself from the discrimination. Unfortunately, due to the beginning of the common occurrences of payola scandals—the paying off of DJs and other radio personnel for advertising privileges–and other frauds in the radio industry, this career move threw her even deeper into the heart of it all. While dealing with all of these legal issues, Professor D’Amico began to completely lose faith in the music industry. To her, not only was it becoming too focused on profit, she also noticed that there seemed to be a general trend towards loss of individuality amongst musicians. She worried about the future of the industry as well. She was afraid that soon, the record companies were going to have to find new ways to make a profit, especially now that the Internet was becoming such a prominent option for music promotion, sales, and more. Also, now that she saw the introduction of individual performers promoting and recording themselves, she worried that sound quality would be sacrificed in the long run, in exchange for the use of programs that made the availability of music that much easier. It was at this point that she decided to leave the music industry entirely. Soon after, though, she moved to teaching, which she realized was a main interest of hers, even though it was “late in the game.”

“When I was a little kid, whenever I was sick my dad—he was a college professor–would take me to his classes with him. It was the coolest thing ever! Of course, I never even considered teaching until I had already become deeply entrenched in a completely different career. But, here I am!” She said as she looked around.

Where do you expect yourself to be in the next decade? What about after that? After you’ve reached those goals you so longed to reach—what will happen then? Sometimes, it takes some misdirection to decide upon a true life goal. For Professor D’Amico, even though she thought she knew exactly what she wanted from the industry for more than 10 years, there were other options out there that she wanted to explore. Still, she is just one example of what one can accomplish—all across the board—with just some effort and passion.

(Music Used:

“Baba O’Riley” by The Who; “Won’t Get Fooled Again” by The Who; “Another Brick in the Wall” by Pink Floyd.)

Innocent men await their deaths in jail, tortured by their traditional white Southern guard, with absolutely no escape. In the meantime, let’s do the cakewalk! Scottsboro Boys was a musical unlike any I had ever seen. First of all, it was the first I have seen that could be placed in the historical genre and showed factual events of America after the Civil War. Of course, because it is a play and therefore must be entertaining, details were warped and embellished, however the main idea of the play was rooted in harsh reality.

Eight black men and one black boy who are simply trying to change their lives and escape to better things are all illegally riding a cargo train. Two young white women are riding this train as well, and, when the police find them, they decide that if they pretend these men raped them, the officer will completely forget about the fact that they should not have been on the train in the first place.

This lie, which seemed small and insignificant to the racist white women, got these nine men thrown into jail and ultimately destroyed their lives. How could these be turned into entertainment, one might ask. Through the addition of catchy songs and dances, with great caricatures of all the typical figures found in Southern tales such as these, such as the white minister who attempts to present himself as pure and holy yet is still just as racist as the other Southern white men. The caricatures were honestly the greatest I have ever seen. Never did I imagine that I would see an African American man playing a white Jewish lawyer so convincingly. I found myself often forgetting that there was only one Caucasian male in the show, who acted as the emcee and interrupted the story to bring humor into it when it seemed to becoming too realistic and therefore too dark.

Because of these inserts, one almost forgets that the play they are watching is ultimately a tragedy revealing the horrific effects of racism on the lives of nine innocent men. By inserting song and dance into the story, the true implications of the tale hit hard when, at the end of the play, the fates of all nine men are announced. During this scene, aside from a solitary monotone voice, there is absolute silence. When this occurs, the humor and entertainment from the musical vanishes completely, and I left the theater with a sad sense of realization about the horrific events found in American history.

It’s ironic to consider that while I admittedly possess little artistic ability, I have a very critical eye for what I consider art to be. While some may label this knack as hypocritical, I consider it to be an inner voice a reason. Call me old fashioned, but in my mind the best art is that which possesses an identifiable subject, like the statue of David, or any other of Michelangelo’s works. You can only imagine then how I must have felt surrounded by various Jackson Pollacks and other abstract works at the Museum of Modern Art last week.

Before proceeding any further, I think it is important to point out that I have but one minor problem with the (no doubt) effort-filled, time consuming works that were on display: they aren’t art. (Of course, such is just my opinion and it’s impossible for me to prove the validity of such a claim, but I will make it anyway.) Perhaps my opinion has something to do with my long held belief that if I or my little eight-year old brother could produce a piece of equal or greater value then it ought to be classified not as art, but ‘a piece of work;’ it surely took a great deal of time and effort to produce many of the exhibited pieces and I believe that the phrase, “piece of work” (not ‘piece of art’), best captures the intentions of the artist whose work it is, and at the same time leaves a certain reverence for the successes of the artists in the past.

The first ‘piece of work’ that I came across was the two-fans exhibit at the base of the stairwell leading to floor number two. The piece, which featured constantly moving circular strips of material between two fans was certainly an attention-grabber. Was it creative? Yes. Did it pass the MoMLB (me or my little brother) test? No; and it certainly wouldn’t be the last piece to earn that distinction. Perhaps though more than any other section in the museum, it was the Barnett Newman display that I will remember the most. Newman, it appeared enjoyed very simplistic pieces, often only one or two colors were used along with his ‘trademark’ vertical line (how original). The room may as well have contained one painting as they seemingly all were reworks of the same concept. Worse than that though was the slovenly painted inch and a half wide by nine feet high piece of canvas that hung in the far right corner of the room. If that was art, then the molding in my house just needs to be turned upright, and I would have 4 Newman-esque works in each room of my house. Newman’s work though wouldn’t be the last that forced me to question my traditional artistic viewpoint, as nearly everything else that I saw made me ask myself the question, ‘Is this art, or not?’

As I left the museum on Thursday, if nothing else I learned that there are plenty of ways to look at any particular piece of work. Am I really as intolerant toward new forms of ‘art’ as the better half of my paper suggests? No, I am though very leery on those who suggest that anything can be art; ultimately it boils down to the one’s vantage point: art to you very well may not be art to me. Then again, it’s always good to expand one’s horizon, and the trip was no exception, I saw things I wouldn’t have ordinarily seen and am glad that I did.

Modern art is controversial. A lot of people hate it, claiming their infant sibling could create a canvass equivalent to those of Pollock or Newman. Maybe they could, I won’t bother to elucidate the technical details of most of these pieces. People tend to look at a persons art and life separately. Those who claim Jackson Pollock was a foolish drunk who drowned his life in a bottle and occasionally splattered paint on a board are differentiating between his life and work to a hypercritical and frankly illogical degree. Dislike of an artwork is not reason enough to ridicule the artist. For the most part abstract artists were the first of their kind, exploring new mediums and challenging old unspoken restrictions on painting, drawing and design. At a bare minimum these artists deserve a degree of respect and an acknowledgement for their part in the liberating of art.

Not everyone is a fan of red boxes and brown lines, abstract art is an acquired taste; it’s sort of the olive of the art world. The various subcategories of the trend vary so immensely that it is easy to love one work and hate another. I appreciate abstract art. The most extreme versions tend to shy away from my personal taste, I’m not big on hanging up a black canvass and calling it brilliant but someone saw some value in doing so, and others manage to enjoy it.

I have come to know the much of the permanent collection at Moma well, but it’s impossible to wander its halls and not find something that feels new. This time the first piece that stuck with me was “Glass in Snow” by Harry Callahan. Upon initial glass this photograph looks like some random black lines and squiggles thrown upon a paper but after adjusting to the lighting and soft shadows, you recognize the sharp shards of glass implanted in what you’re told is a bank of snow. What I found so appealing about the piece was the invisibleness of the shards, without the description one would have any idea that the figures were glass. It’s dangerous, and really beautiful at the same time. I found the image to be both refreshing and intriguing and Callahan’s other photos were of similar style.

The other piece I was impressed with was “Untitled” by Norman Lewis (1949). It’s an oil painting on canvas but completely different in design from any oil I’ve seen before. My taste in fine art is eclectic but when I draw or paint I prefer design as opposed to figure sketching. This piece is dark and fluid but with contrasting straight edges that don’t actually distract you from the smoothness of the piece. I like the mystery, it looks like it could be the background of a fantasy movie or the sort of thing you imagine while reading a dark novel.

Every time I visit Moma I do so from slightly older eyes. It’s interesting to note the pieces that I always love, the ones I lose interest in and the ones I see differently having since learned different things. Knowledge of an artist’s life can provide a new level of appreciation for his or her work while understanding of a time period can reveal subtle commentaries within a piece. Moma continues to impress me with its unique array of exhibitions and again its lovely permanent collection. I look forward to what it will offer next.

A simple suitcase is able to capture a single momentous time in history that is often forgotten. During the visit to the International Center of Photography, the first exhibit was “The Mexican Suitcase,” which reveals an honest and unaltered aspect of the Spanish Civil War. Upon entrance into the museum, the first visual stimulant was an image of a suitcase, containing rolls of film, purposefully enlarged and placed to introduce the entire exhibit. Upon entering the exhibit, the first photograph I witnessed was of the two photographers, Gerda Taro and Robert Capa. Their works were the focus of the entire exhibit, but the most alarming fact was that they were both romantically involved. This is a fantastic approach because it adds depth to an otherwise formal and plain exhibit. Additionally, it seems like even after death, the photographers Taro and Capa would be forever linked.

As I proceeded further and had the chance to see several photographs, I learned aspects of the Spanish Civil War that certainly would not be discussed in many history courses. The neat order in which photographs were presented in the exhibit kept me highly interested in the topic, and I was able to learn of the traumatizing events that people and nations endured during the war. Beginning with Capa’s photographs, I was able to understand his interest in the war. In his photographs, Capa was capable of embodying the soldiers and their daily activities in a harsh environment. Most importantly, Capa captured photographs of such warfronts, such as the Aragon Front, which revealed the barren and empty areas each soldier had to partake in. This photographer’s style reveals the empty and meaningless nature of the soldiers and the war. Personally, this made it easier for me to visualize and understand the full impact of a war, especially the Spanish Civil War. Another photographer, by the name of Chim, approached taking photographs of the war in a different light. Chim’s photographs presented at the exhibit display themes of religion and its role in the war. From this photographer’s vision I was able to comprehend the importance of religion, its rituals and prayers, to the soldiers. In addition, I learned that religion was intertwined with a certain type of culture found in war.

Although some photographs were easy to study, others were not because of the miniature size of the images. It was sometimes hard to understand what an image portrayed because I would have a difficult time differentiating between the shapes and colors. At certain points during the exhibit, the photographs were made into a collage that was aesthetically pleasing, but hard to distinct as an individual image. Another feature of the exhibit was the silent video documentary on the wall. This was a reasonable attempt to aid individuals during there time, but failed because of the lack of sound. Sound bites often complement our visual perception, and often serve as an effective tool. But this creative addition failed in its utility to further provide further information about the Spanish Civil War or the photographers.

“The Mexican Suitcase” exhibit was small, but powerful enough to convey the historical significance of the Spanish Civil War and life within it. This visit to the International Center of Photography was certainly a crucial part of the curriculum, as it pleasantly surprised me with its content filled with old documents and photographs from the war.

What is art? Is it a series of lines drawn strategically to create an image, or is it a series of lines randomly scrawled across a blank canvas? Is it a blatant image, or is it abstract? Is it a story of a person, or is it a story of emotion? The Museum of Modern Art gave me a glimpse of the wide variety of art that artists have to offer the world.

Upon entering, I saw a glass container holding soil and a few green plants. As simple as this structure was, I thought it resembled the essence of art in nature. I thought it was a clever piece of art right at the entrance of the MoMa, a small glimpse of the art that was to be presented once I passed the ticket holders and walked toward the galleries waiting for my viewing.

When I walked upstairs, I encountered a colorful array of empty food containers and household products stacked and splayed across a wall of white; this was George Maciunas’ “One Year.” It amazed me to see every item Maciunas ate or drank behind this glass display. Maciunas was the leader of the fluxus movement, where artists and music composers all over the world focused on anti-art and anti-music to subvert previous art traditions. The fluxus movement focused on each artist’s individuality and gave each artist the freedom to express his or her art in ways that were untraditional in the past. Maciunas took me by surprise by using organized food containers to use as art materials rather than the typical paint and blank canvas. It was a collage all on its own: Maciunas stacked his food item packages according to the product itself and made the heights vary in such a way that the peaks appeared to resemble the skyscrapers of New York City.

As I walked through the MoMa, I entered the Abstract Expressionism display subtitled “The Big Picture.” These artists aimed to create art that would “reassert the highest ideals of humankind” (MoMa). I noticed many of these abstract works resembled pain and destruction to refer to the war and Holocaust that occurred in the years prior to the movement. Jackson Pollock’s “The Flame” immediately caught my eye as I entered the gallery; the dark colors of black and red emanated fire and the black claw-like strokes resembled victims’ hands outstretched for help during the Holocaust. The oil paint on the fiberboard canvas seemed the painting texture the way flames have texture.

As I continued into the next room, I saw huge canvases with scarce strokes of lines. Barnett Newman was an artist who made paintings that “downplayed traceable signs of the artist’s hand” (MoMa). One particular work called “The Voice” featured a white canvas with an off-white line going down the right side of the painting. As I approached the painting to look at the strokes, it appeared as if the painting was a photograph, for it was completely smooth and I could not tell that it had been painted onto the canvas. All of Newman’s paintings varied in the colors used and the locations of these vertical lines. I noticed that in some of these paintings, the vertical lines were painted first before the “ground,” or the space behind the vertical lines, and others had the vertical lines painted after the ground was painted.

The next room was abundant in paintings with what appeared to consist of random splashes of paint on canvases. Jackson Pollock proved to be one of the most profound abstract expressionists in his time. He used paint pouring and drip techniques to cover his canvases in a completely abstract way. Although Pollock’s “Full Fathom Five” was one of his first pieces using drip technique, it appeared to be the most complex; I had to speculate the painting to see the nails and keys and cigarettes embedded underneath the oil paints. Incorporating these items into his work gave the painting more texture and dimension overall. His other works consisted of the characteristic drip technique he was known for and also varied in colors. Most of his works had the colors black and white in it to show extreme contrasts in the paintings. After seeing his characteristic drip technique paintings, I came across “Echo: Number 25, 1951.” It was completely different from his other paintings and seemed to have an abstract pattern to it. Using only black and beige colors, he created feather-like strokes on his canvas and elegant swirls. It gave the painting a whimsical, feminine touch, which was a vast difference compared to his other works.

As I walked into a room full of sculptures, I came across David Smith’s “Cubi X.” I really enjoyed looking at this structure because I could see the silhouette of a person walking mid-stride. There is a bit of irony with Smith’s use of stainless steel, a metal that does not easily bend; this structure depicts a person in motion, perhaps even dancing, and motion requires fluidity and movement, something that metal is not meant to do. I admire all of these artists, especially the abstract artists due to their vast creativity and vision in creating works of art that require viewers to look beyond what is displayed in front of them; I thoroughly enjoyed delving into my imagination to see what images I could fathom from these pieces of art.

Image from: http://kikoshouse.blogspot.com/2008_05_01_archive.html

Taken by: Sara Krulwich

I was excited for Sara Krulwich to come speak to our class because a quick google images search will lead you to some beautiful theatre photos that she has taken. When she came though, she showed that she had a lot more to offer than insight into theatre photography. She has a rich story and a history involved with the Women’s rights movement, as she fought to be let onto a stadium where women were not allowed to be so that she could photograph for her college newspaper. She told us about her first going into sports photography, which was not her passion at all, but eventually making it to theatre.

Even though she did not want to be a sports photographer, the experience showed her many things which actually help with theatre photography. In sports, you have to get the camera ready and be able to predict when something interesting is about to happen. If you just wait for it to happen and then click, you’ll miss the shot. The same applies for theatre photography because you always have to be one step ahead of what’s going to happen or else you’ll miss the shot that would’ve made the newspaper.

Her words are inspirational because they show that even when you’re stuck in a less than ideal situation, there’s always some way to learn and grow out of it for the future. It seems that she has it made now, her job requires her going to plays almost every night and photographing them. She also has had some cool experiences with work projects such as getting to shoot from behind the scenes which gives you a totally different perspective in a play.

Sara Krulwich is successful but remains humble, warm, friendly, and is quick to offer pointers to the beginners in photography of our IDC class. She told us not to be afraid to get too close. You might make some people uncomfortable, but if you stick to it you’ll have some great shots. I found that in my street photography project I stayed away from real people (I did representations of faces) because I was afraid to photograph them without their approval, and I didn’t want posed shots either. Next time I photograph I will certainly take her advice and see what I come out with.

From the first piece we saw at MoMA, “One Year” by George Maciunas, I knew that in order to enjoy this trip I had to abandon my previous notions of what art is. The Fluxus movement is contradictory in nature… an art form that promotes anti-art ideals. Their goal is to expand our definition of what art is and one must keep an open mind when taking in a piece such as this, which seems like just a collection of things piled up on a wall. Even though it is anti-art, I do see elements of traditional art in it. I can tell that each item is carefully thought out and placed, and as a whole makes a pattern of bright colors in an unexpected medium.

Once we got to the main exhibition of Abstract Expressionist Art, I found that the paintings I could appreciate most were the ones that were grounded in reality, and had elements of a face or a body that I could point out. Sometimes I couldn’t pick anything out upon first look, but was able to identify some things after reading the title and background information next to it. This made the experience feel like a scavenger hunt, it was fun to try to guess and find what the artist was trying to portray when he painted. I appreciate this about abstract art because in this way the realistic pieces are too easy, there’s more to this than just drawing what’s in front of you.

One painting I particularly enjoyed was by Adolph Gottlieb, entitled “Man Looking at Woman” (1949) I liked this painting because it uses simple colors, just greyscale with a bit of yellow and maybe a dull pink. There are squiggles and lines which i’m unsure of the significance of, if there is any. These surround the focus of the piece which, as the title would allude, is a man looking at a woman. They are drawn in an interesting way though; the whole piece gives the viewer an air of hieroglyphics. It must be difficult for someone in 1949, which are fairly recent times, to try to capture an art form that dates back to 4000BC but I think he is very successful in reaching his goal.

Another theme that I found in many paintings that texture. It was quite interesting how thick the paint is layered on some of these pieces, and how different colors are used each layer which serves to give a unique look to the painting. Many of them I found were painted using “oil and sand on canvas,” such as “Western Air” by Robert Motherwell. I took a close up of this painting to show what stuck out in my mind, which was the gritty and messy feeling of the painting which could probably only be achieved using the rough sand.

Overall, I had a great experience visiting MoMA. However, as much as I open my mind to what art is, I don’t think I’ll ever gain an appreciation for pieces like this one:

What is art? That was the question we were given when we had arrived at the Museum on Modern Art. Despite spending a couple of hours walking around, observing some of the most famous art works in the world, I left still not knowing exactly what art was. Art is subjective and that is the only answer to that question. What I find to be a masterpiece, you may find to be a piece of trash. And vice versa. Depending on each person, people find different meanings in different pieces of work. It is what you make of each painting or sculpture or drawing that makes it art.

MoMA introduced me to a wide variety of abstract art that I have to admit, seemed very odd to me. A white wall painted over and over in different colors? That’s art? A few swirly lines? That’s a masterpiece? I think I remember myself doing that same work when I was about five years old. Those are the types of thoughts that went through my mind when seeing works such as those. Barnett Newman was a main artist at the museum that had a whole room dedicated to his work. I couldn’t believe that his art goes for thousands of dollars. But that goes to show that art doesn’t have a definite meaning. I should not be criticizing someone who has major works in a museum such as the MoMA. Just because I don’t find his work to be powerful or interesting, that doesn’t mean others don’t either. Obviously people do if Newman is such an acclaimed and successful artist.

Although I have to admit that I wasn’t so amazed by a few of the paintings and other works of art that we saw at the MoMA, most of the pieces we saw I do consider to be art. One of my favorite artists I saw in the exhibit was Jackson Pollock. One thing I especially admired about his work is that his paintings have texture. He had depth in his art and it popped colors out at you that really grab your attention. “When I am in my painting, I’m not aware of what I’m doing. It is only after a sort of ‘get acquainted’ period that I see what I have been about. I have no fear of making changes, destroying the image, etc., because the painting has a life of its own. I try to let it come through. It is only when I lose contact with the painting that the result is a mess. Otherwise there is pure harmony, an easy give and take, and the painting comes out well.” -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jackson_Pollock
As you can see from this quote by Jackson Pollock, he simply let’s his paint have a life of its own. He doesn’t think too much about what he is drawing. He just DOES IT! It is like he makes abstract art in an abstract manner of doing so. Nothing is organized or prepared. It is simply spontaneous and that is what makes his work so unique.

I think one of the greatest things about abstract art is that you can make the painting or sculpture what you want it to be. There is no concrete picture being portrayed so the viewer can observe the piece in his or her own way. For example, at one point in the museum Matthew and I walked by a sculpture that appeared to resemble some type of animal. Matt said it was a fish. I said it was a grasshopper. It turns out the name of the sculpture was “Australia.” Abstract art brings opinion upon itself and that is okay. We should all be able to find different images and meanings behind what we see.

I am definitely glad that we were able to go to the MoMA because it without a doubt opened up my eyes to the various forms of art in the world. And whether I agree with some or not, it is still good to know the variety behind the different styles.