The Arts in New York City

Joseph Cornell is a pretty interesting person. His artwork isn’t compeltely mind-blowing, in my opinon, but I absolutely love “Les Abeilles.” I thoguht it was beautiful.

As a person, though, I have so much empathy for Cornell. Reading about him makes him seem just so unbearably sad and lonely, and his art reflects that. The need to keep scraps and pieces of the past–to keep static, pointless things–is such a desperate way to hold onto the past, to a time when things were better. He feels his life is out of control, and needs to find a way to simplify it, made it small and safe and neat and unchanging, perfectly organized, when life isn’t–and can never be–that way.

A lot of his artwork I do enjoy looking it, and some I do feel like he put so much emotion into it. Although he is not my favorite artist ever, I have a deep respect and empathy for him and all he had to go through, and how he found a way to express himself through his art, if nothing else.

One of the biggest compliments I think you can pay an artist is to say that his work is inseparable from his personal passions. Although Cornell’s life to us seems torturous and in fact an imprisonment of a man, we can never really know whether he did enjoy it or not. His artwork offers a window into the mind of a human being who certainly took pride in order and perfection. Perhaps his place in his life was perfect for him, no matter how strange it may seem to us. To produce such powerful, yet subdued, works of art takes a lot of suffering and no small amount of courage. I suppose that’s my roundabout way of saying I like his work.

I was actually inspired by the way Joseph Cornell was able to assemble random bits of pieces from across different media to evoke certain emotions. He captured the beautiful and the ephemeral in unconventional ways: by using things from everyday life that are usually overlooked. I found it genius on his part.

However, his art is really confusing until you learn what went into the process of making the art and that was kind of annoying while reading the book. i tried to see what the art was meant to say on my own but it was in vain. So unlike other art, I felt like cornell’s art is pointless without its background. Nevertheless, once you have the full picture, the art tells a tremendous about cornell’s character and the scope of his imagination.

One artwork that I liked was “homage to the romantic ballet: a swan lake for tamara toumanova” – I like the way he made the idea of “frozen aspirations” the center of the art and then surrounded it with feathers which represent an example of one of those frozen things he cannot change. And the 2 artworks = “woman and sewing machine” and “penny arcade portrait of Lauren bacall” = I found myself staring at them for a while for some reason.

Regarding the show, I wish I could have read the book before I seeing the show, maybe I would’ve actually appreciated the work rather than just finding it boring and weird.

His work is very different from anything I’d ever seen! Even though it’s not conventional, it does give off meaning as other artworks do. His artwork is just… boxy and there are random placement of things in those boxes. It’s very original, but I like traditional artworks better, probably because I’m use to it and I feel that they hold more meaning than a box filled with items. Even though it might be very meaningful to Cornell, it doesn’t seem to convey meaning to me as much.
It is nice to look at though and the image on page 63 of the “Soap Bubble Set” is cute. Also, the degree of difficulty seems to not be as difficult as traditional artworks such as sculptures, paintings and mosaics.
Just about anything can be called an artwork such as the men’s toliet featured in a museum. That is outrageous to me because it seems to be mocking art. This is somewhere in the lower middle of the toliet and true artworks like the Mona Lisa. It is uncommon but it does have some attributes that can be deemed as fascinating and art-like.
I like some of his art, but not as much as I like the traditional art. I don’t really feel anything from it and I’m somewhat confused by it because I don’t really understand the meaning that it’s trying to get across (if it even has a meaning to convey).
People have different views though and they might think he is the world’s best artist who was ever born on this earth. His artwork makes me think he himself is a very eccentric person and he likes to keep things neat. Maybe he doesn’t like to step out his box, that’s why he always place items inside of a box.

Its common knowledge: Every artist is a little bit nuts. Cornell’s work shows that he is no exception. You have to be a little crazy to spend your days collecting junk and even crazier to be able to make this junk speak of your innermost thoughts. It is very difficult to express one’s feelings without words. Cornell’s boxes seem to be the key to the doors of his mind. I think its amazing how at first glance, the boxes look like toys, but after careful examination, the objects in each box tell a story. Sometimes, they can even teach a lesson. The bubble, for example, reminds the viewer to cherish every moment because it won’t last forever, but will disappear just like a bubble. Though Cornell’s art is unconventional, I find it to be more profound (not more aesthetically pleasing) than a Caravaggio painting.

Joseph Cornell’s work does not seem like art at first glance. Some of his pieces seem simplistic and childish. In the work “Hotel Eden” none of the pieces seem to fit together. A bird with a string in its mouth, a yellow ball, many frames, and a bottle filled with odds and ends. Cornell’s work may appear “all over the place” and undefined but each piece seems to have a deeper meaning.
I sympathize with Cornell for he did not have an easy life.
One of Cornell’s pieces that attracted my attention was “A Pantry Ballet.” It is a box that appears toy-like with its dancing lobsters but it holds much information in it. Cornell used lobsters because in “Alice and Wonderland” there is a chapter entitled “The Lobster Quadrille” and the cancan beat comes from the quadrille, a dance. I was in awe of the thinking and the putting together of ideas that went into this piece.
Although I find Cornell’s work confusing, I do appreciate the underlying meanings of his art. However, without having read the book “The Essential Joseph Cornell” I would not have understood the artwork of Joseph Cornell.

Joseph Cornell’s art is truly unique. While it may seem as if it is just bits and pieces of meaningless household things, it is fascinating just how much Cornell actually says through each piece. Only after careful consideration do you realize just how much each seemingly random item fits together. Cornell’s art almost exactly recreates what he was thinking at the time and this seems to reveal why certain objects were added. These extensive connections are perhaps why I, like Amy, found his “A Pantry of Ballet” so fascinating. Thanks to the book, I know just what Cornell may have been thinking. This piece reveals just how far-fetched, but strangely still related, each object was. Another piece I found interesting was the Soap Bubble Set, which contains objects relating to astronomy. Again, it seems as if the presence and placement of each object has a specific meaning—however, one that is not explicitly seen. This piece especially makes the viewer think about the human quest for knowledge but at the same time the vastness of the natural world. I find it amazing that when these simple objects come together in Cornell’s boxes, they seem to take on much greater meanings.
This and many of his other works show that despite deceivingly simple appearances, the composition of each work is well thought out. I guess the best description for the content of Cornell’s art is, as the book states, “an itch that could not be scratched,” (page 66) suggesting that each piece makes the viewer want to know more or find out something that seems almost impossible to reason.

His artwork is definitely original. Although sometimes i feel like anyone could have done what he did, and well WE are going to in class,some of his work does look beautiful. I really liked the lady and the sewing machine piece. It looked printed but it was really cut and pasted. He had amazing talent in blending the different elements of his collages.

His work is inspiring. After seeing the way he turns trash to treasure, it made me want to do the same. So I’m actually glad that we’re doing the project on Thursday.

The first time I opened the book, The Essential Joseph Cornell, I merely flipped through it and glanced at his works of art. My first reaction was that his work is just different, unconventional. I didn’t find any of the works particularly stunning or eye-catching. Actually, I was wondering why Cornell was even deemed an artist. I could have stuck a bicycle wheel on a white stool as well.

However, when I read through the book, this time actually reading the biographical content of it as well, I was much more appreciative of Cornell. His ability to incorporate his emotions and life struggles into his artwork was astounding. The way he used text, images, glass, string and other random objects to create a piece of art was amazing. Also, upon examining each work more closely, I realized that to produce a work like Cornell’s, one needs a lot of creativity and skill. I have a feeling it’s going to be a lot harder than it looks. I guess we’ll see how it goes tomorrow.

Also, after reading the book - Hotel Casseopoeia makes a lot more sense. Although it still isn’t my favorite show of all time, I now understand it and admire the creativity used in bringing Joseph Cornell’s works to life.

I feel that we are making a bigger deal out of Cornell and his work than he and it deserves. To me he is an average guy who had to much time on his hands and thought about things to much.
Anyone can see beauty in anything, it isn’t just Cornell who saw beauty in the everyday junk all around us. And he isn’t the only one that collected junk either. The only thing special about Cornell is that he organized his junk in a different, more artistic way. For that I’ll give him credit.
Hotel Casseopoeia portrayed Cornell in a much more depressing light than it should have. It focused too much on his being in his basement in awkward situations when he was actually out and about a lot ad very in the social scene. I don’t feel very bad for him because I think he secretly enjoyed being a depressed artist.

Cornell’s art is definitely eye catching with all the different media that he uses, like the lobsters, however I cant quite picture him as a great artist. It seems as if hes just taking up time with a hobby and collecting random objects he finds. Then he uses his spare time finding symbolism in these objects and placing them in boxes. I, as a horrible artist, don’t like to consider works that i could possibly create as magnificent pieces of art. Reading about him and his unique life however gives me some insight on how he could have focused his life on making his creations. If i had not known about his experiences i would have probably thought it was a collection of crafts projects someone did as a hobby on their spare time. His art is unique in that many other works of art leave you in a quandary of what it could possibly mean, yet his work, as someone else mentioned, was completely different from what i thought it could mean and had a definite meaning that he set to symbolize something specific.

at first i thought cornell’s work was strange and disjointed, but after reading more about it, i began to apreciate his works, and now i even enjoy them. they are endearing because of their innocence and clarity but have a tinge of sophistication that give them depth. they stem from a childlike outlook outlook on life but with the real problems that adults face. his work leaves room for the imagination and for each person to have their own interpretation. the bright colors and unique materials he uses, make his art eye-catching and appealing to the senses.

Joseph Cornell’s art in general, is interesting new and very original. He was always able to maintain that originality of expression in all of his works.
They bear no resemblance to any other art . His work bore similar forms with the art of the day..during his time as with his involvement in the prevailing surrealist art forms…however, he controlled their expression to be so obviously Joseph Cornell! It’s no wonder that he was considered a pioneering artist that set the stage for Pop art and other contemporary art works after the W.W. II.
I particularly like and am impressed with his art works that have duplicated copies within the frames and can’t help trying to play ’spot the difference’ when I see any of them. I find the picture on the last page quite intriguing too….Talk about intentional art! Seeing it, I can’t help but think that apart from genius,Joseph Cornell must have had quite a good sense of humour?

I can’t really imagine Joseph Cornell as an artist. He did create art that no other artist has probably ever thought of, especially in comparison to Cornell’s style, but I’m sure most children have. His idea of putting things inside a box doesn’t seem original when I think of what a kindergartener in art class would do.

I sympathize for him. His life was difficult but his art just illustrated a confused little kid cutting and pasting things in my mind.

I believe we generally under appreciate what Cornell was able to do which such a simple concept. Having experience his form of art in class this past Thursday, I have a new found reverence for his work. Simply “placing objects in boxes” is not as simple as it may seem. There is far more then meets the naked eye in his work. To get his message across, for everything to appear so natural and stunning, requires a great deal of talent which due to the medium of the work, it can be easily written off. Yes, Cornell methodically collected things we would have quickly thrown away and placed them in boxes and yes anyone can do such a simple action. But, can we make it look as powerful and graceful as he did?

Trying to create a box like Cornell’s on Thursday definitely gave me new appreciation for him and his work. Most of his boxes feel so fluid and seamless, everything feels to be in the place it was meant to be in. For me on Thursday, this felt like an impossible task. It is one thing to envision it, but to place it down takes such an eye that I feel like I lack. Cornell was able to see the piece in his mind, and then recreate it–including all the emotion he felt–perfectly inside a box. Although he is unconventional, and many people are quick to write him off (I admit before I read about him I though his work wasn’t the most skilled), when trying to recreate his work, you can see how challenging it is, and how skilled Cornell had to be in order to create such majestic pieces of artwork out of the simplest everyday things.

The work of Joseph Cornell was very interesting. Though I dint really appreciate the work, because it did not look like it required a lot of effort, I am sure it was designed and created with a specific reason behind each work. And I did not understand the most of the art work with the boxes. One of my favorite work was Abeilles. I understood the art, and i liked it. The activity that we did in the class was perfect to understand Cornell’s art. I was surprised that it took more effort to do the art work, than merely using a paintbrush to create art. After a while, I realized that I was really immersed into creating the box which was my form art. I have been inspired to learn other similar art as well.

Joseph Cornell’s work, in addition to his biography, were very interesting and extremely unique. Cornell’s erratic lifestyle is reflected in his very surreal artwork. His combination of techniques makes for very original work. Many people have different opinions of Cornell’s work; to enjoy his art, one must have that special acquired taste. And to appreciate his art, one must also be open minded in what art can be interpreted as, even if it does involve junk and trash.