Author: David Berger

Review of Slash: Paper Under the Knife

This past week I visited Slash: Paper Under the Knife– an exhibit at the Museum of Art and Design featuring art made out of paper. The exhibit celebrates the recent boom in the use of paper in creating art and is the third exhibition in the museum’s  Materials and Process series, which “examines the renaissance of traditional handcraft materials and techniques in contemporary art and design,” as the Museum website puts it. Many of the works have been done on site and specifically for the exhibit.

Immediately when you walk into the first floor of the exhibit you see a large paper tank. Upon moving closer you see stag beetles covering the outer layer of the vehicle, and when you really look closer it becomes apparent that the paper the tank is made out of is not blank paper, but rather pages out of the Jewish prayer book, the siddur. The tank (a german tank) represents German aggression during World War II and the stag beetle, which, in Middle Eastern culture, typically represents a resilient native population. The artist is Pietro Ruffo and the piece is called “Youth of the Hills” (2008).

This foreshadowed the manner in which many of the works in Slash are viewed. Many have appealing and intriguing structures, but upon looking closer at the paper, a deeper message can be found.

Such is the case with the creations of Sangeeta Sandrasegar. Her reclining and rocking chairs made out of paper are cut out in the middle to depict war scenes with guns and barbed wire. The contrast of the comfort of a rocking chair and the backrest filled with violence is not a coincidence.

However, just because it has a meaning embedded into a structure made out of paper does not make it good art. Rob Ryan’s “Can We Shall We” is two lover’s atop a hill with steps leading up to it embedded with quotations of longing such as “can we” and “shall we.” It looked like house art or art that could be found in store for $20 dollars instead of an exhibit in NYC.

Not all of the pieces have a hidden message, some are very creative designs and other’s utilize the effects of bright colors  such as Oliver Herring’s “Alex”- a lifesize sculpture of a human covered in different color patches of paper, some of which are colored photos of that part, such as a photo of a toe on the toe of the sculpture.  I particularly was impressed the way many artists utilized the layering possiblities offered by paper as opposed to paint alone. This can clearly be seen in “Paperworks” by Andreas Kocks- a giant black inkblot looking form on an upper wall of the exhibit. Certain parts of it protrude outward as a result of layering paper, and this creates a sort of 3-D effect.

I think the exhibit was definitely worth my time. It was well put together and the layout was pleasing. I was very impressed and captivated simply by what artists could do creatively with paper. Besides for its novelty, some of the works I would consider fine pieces of art, but not many. It may not be worth a special trip, but if you are in the area or just looking for something intriguing, the Slash exhibit is definitely worth giving a try.

Art vs. Science

When trying to figure out whether art or science is a better medium through which to explain the world, one must look at their inherent functions and components.

Art by nature is expressive. If it loses it’s element of expression and becomes something pragmatic or structural, it ceases to be art. This is because art conveys. It conveys opinions and is thus subjective. It exclaims rather than explains. Science, in contrast, is explanatory. It attempts to say what is and what is known.

While “measurement is not always imperfect,” that does not take away from the goal. Any part of art that attempts to do what science does, to explain something to a degree of fact, becomes structural, and thus does not go any lengths in defining that piece as “art.” Measurements are only imperfect because the goal has not been met, not because science is the wrong tool to use in explaining the world.

Math was created to quantify; when quantifying we use math. Similarly, science was created to explain the world, and thus when we explain the world we use science. Art on the other hand was created to express, so when one wishes to express, he uses art.

While there are limitations to science’s ability to explain, they are only birthed from the limitations of what science claims to be able to explain. Science only explains the world. It does not explain interactions. Sometimes it attempts to explain the world at point of interaction, such as the chemicals that are released in moments of love or fear, it does not attempt to explain anything beyond the structure and nature.

Art comes to explain our interactions with that structure and how we live with nature- what does war feel like? What happens when few have much and many have little?

And so, if we wish to replicate our understanding of the world, we should do so with the tool used to explain it, for understanding is gained through explanation. That tool is science. If we would like replicate elements of life in our explanation of the world, if we would like to explain how we interact with the world, certainly that is where art comes in.

Why is there such an emphasis on explaining how the world works instead of how we interact with it? Because our understanding of how the world works is something that would not be known if not for the time taken to study it, and after studying it you can understand how it works. However, a full understanding of how we interact with the world can not be fully known unless experienced- all the art in the world will never be able to truly convey what it feels like to have your heart broken or what it feels like to witness a sunset firsthand.

Review of the New York Philharmonic Open Rehearsal

The New York Philharmonic Orchestras rehersal was enlightening. As a novice of classical music and orchestras in general, i did not have any expectations and could not say whether i was someone who appreciated classical music or orchestras in general. That changed by the end.

My lack of knowledge was so obvious and acute that after the orchestra had finished warming up (with scales probably), i turned to my classmate and said “they don’t seem very good,” thinking that was an actual piece. However, when the first piece actually did begin i was taken aback by the deepness and complexity of the music which seemed to fill the room. I have heard scores in the background of movies, i had never heard one live, and it was different to say the least. The music had a sort of fullness and gave a certain satisfaction, particularly when the trumpets and other brass instruments were included. The conductor was not too over the top but still seemed to be doing his job from what i could tell, and some of the most interesting moments were when he would stop the music and verbally engage the musicians. I could not here what he was saying but people in the front row often laughed and he was no doubt offering his constructive criticism. It was interesting to see how a professional conductor interacts with  a professional orchestra.

Despite my appreciating for the orchestra’s uniqueness, i was not entertained by it. I have great veneration for the musicians and i understand why other people appreciate it, to me it was like a bad movie with great effects- impressive and sometimes captivating, but not something i would go to again. My interest had reached its peak in the first 5 minutes and was reduced to boredom after the first piece. The entire performance seemed entirely too long, though i cannot say for sure since i am not exactly an aficionado. Those around me who understand and like classical music seemed to have found the music very enjoyable, for a novice like myself, it was not.

Is Dance a Language?

Dance is not a language. Rather, it is a form of expression, and can be a very powerful one at that. Language must be structured and consistent, it has set meanings and definitions of its words. Dance, has no structured means of communication, rather, it is dependent on interpretation by the audience. In language, ideas are communicated through expression of words, as opposed to dance, in which ideas are communicated through expression of movement, which itself is subject to interpretation.

People in a movement often try and elevate their cause through elevation of diction (there was an article in the new york times recently how the word ‘curate’ now applies not only to those who work in museums, but to anybody who puts effort into selecting something artistic: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/04/fashion/04curate.html?_r=1&pagewanted=1). But this shouldn’t be the case with dance. To make dance a language would take away the interpretive nature of it. It would make the message of the artist completely supersede the experience of the viewer. There is already a name for language through movement: sign language. Characterizing dance as language instead of expression not only fails to elevate it, it demeans it.

Justin Lees Trio at The Garage Review

The Garage (99 7th St) has nightly free jazz performances.

The “Justin Lees Trio” consisted of Rudy (drums), Justin, (double bass) and Michael (hollow-body guitar). The atmosphere of the venue was perfect- the music was right next to the bar and the dim lighting created a very mellow and comfortable atmosphere.

The music was upbeat, but not flashy or eccentric- just perfect for the mood of the crowd and bar. Though not an expert on jazz i fee confident enough to say the band played with a blues style, and perhaps even a sort of swing as well. The drummer mostly tapped the symbols, though he kept it splashy (for lack of a more fitting word). The guitar was done beautifully- the hollow-body guitar was a perfect choice provided a deep and bright blues tone. Most impressive was Justin on the double bass. I am not sure if this is typical or atypical of a jazz performance but he was the centerpiece to me. His hands moved so quick and the rhythms were so engaging. When he took the baseline for a walk he took you along with him through all the highs and lows. He had a few solos and they were masterful and the feeling with which he played was palpable.

Since this is a review and i am supposed to be a journalist i must offer one piece of criticism- the bass, while played beautifully, was too quiet, and while it may have been fine for the regular playing, a bit louder would have made a big difference for the solos.

I would definitely recommend this performance to a friend- the band was very listenable and even a novice like myself was immensely engaged. The lighthearted mood and low key atmosphere make it an ideal place to meet a friend, drink, dine, and listen to wonderful music.

Le nozze di Figaro Review

Le nozze di Figaro is a funny and captivating storyline, transformed seamlessly and beautifully into poetic prose, and performed effusively and impressively at the Metropolitan Opera.

The storyline is not a cliche romance or tragedy, as many (I) would expect coming into an opera written so long ago. Instead, there are many comical events, many of which include miscues and ironic discoveries, such as those between the Count and Cherubino, who was masterful at playing a jester of sorts, drawing out many of the audiences laughs while not being too “over-the-top”.

The set was brilliant. While being clean and classical, it did not fail to engage the viewer with its vibrance. Like many other features of the performance, it was appealing and engaging, but most importantly served its purpose in complementing and magnifying the characters and their situations. With sets often cluttered with people hiding and running about, simplicity was absolutely a well thought out route.

The ending though, is a poor one. The Count spends over 3 hours betraying the Countess, and then, as if with the flick of a switch, the audience is expected to believe he has fallen back in love with the Count. Though playing up the satirical aspect of the opera, it is none the less too much of letdown for the casual viewer.

The tone is one of melancholy and lightheartedness, save for a few select moments magnifying a few of the characters emotion. The most notable of which takes place in Act 3, in which the Countess wonders what happened to the love between her and the Count and laments at its loss. Her voice is low and her movements work in complete synchronization with her singing, as she slowly drops to the floor, taking the viewer down with her in sympathy, as her voice drips with sorrow. Indeed the performances of the Countess and Rosanna were spectacular, both of whom playing their emotions with an understated tastefulness that was truly convincing.

The ending though, is a poor one. The Count spends over 3 hours betraying the Countess, and then, as if with the flick of a switch, the audience is expected to believe he has fallen back in love with the Count. Though playing up the satirical aspect of the opera, it is none the less too much of letdown for the casual viewer.

Nonetheless, I would certainly recommend Figaro to anybody, both experienced opera-goers and the not, as its greatest strength is its ability to entertain, a quality brought out by its comical and lighthearted nature.

Fauvism Art Movement

Fauvism was an art movement made up of 20th century artists known as Les Fauve. Their name was coined by french art critic Louis Vauxcelles who was viewing one of the groups exhibitions, headed by Henri Matisse. The wild brush strokes, bright colors, and simplified design prompted Vauxcelles to call them Fauves, or “Wild Beasts”. Fauvism tried combining impressionism with dramatic colors in the attempt to combine the straightforwardness of impressionism with vivid colors’ great capacity for evoking emotion. they had been tremendously influenced by Van Gough, who also combined impressionism with vivid colors but Fauve artists went even further in liberating color from its distinctive function and using it for both expressive and structural ends (Gardner, 2005). The colors of the paintings are non realistic and the artists use heavy amounts of paint in objects’ centers, and fade into their borders as can clearly be seen in ”Open Window, Collioure” by Henri Matisse, painted in 1905 (see below)
The movement began in Paris at the Salon d’Automne in 1905 and consisted of artists such as Vlaminck, Derain, Marquet, Rouault, Camoin, and Valtat. Matisse was the main figure though, so much so that Fauvism lasted only as long as its originator, Henri Matisse (1869-1954), fought to find the artistic freedom he needed (Pioch 2002). by 1908 many of its painters had moved on to Cubism.

matisse-open-window

Henri Matisse, Open Window, Collioure, 1905, National Gallery of Art, Washington, Collection of Mr. and Mrs. John Hay Whitney 1998.74.7


Works Sited

Helen Gardner, Fred S. Kleiner, Christin J. Mamiya, Gardner’s Art Through the Ages: The western Perspective. (Wadsworth Publishing; 12 edition, February 23, 2005), pp. 738-739

Nicolas Pioch. The Web Museum: Fauvism. 14 Oct 2002
(http://www.ibiblio.org/wm/paint/tl/20th/fauvism.html)

The Artist Historical Perspective

brooklyn-bridge-2

435739773_1514867549_0

My photo matches Hassam’s “A Winter Day on Brooklyn Bridge” because it views the bridge at a spot very close to the manner Hassam portrays it in his painting. The bridge is in the middle-right side of the painting and photo and i believe i have similar vanishing points. The Lamp posts are almost identical and closest post has its head almost level with the bridge in the painting as well as my photo. There are, however, key differences: the bench in the painting is missing, there is no bicycle lane in Hassam’s painting, and the ropes are not there as well. similarly it is clear that the season is different as well as the painting takes place in the winter.

heart-of-the-city

435745580_1514889778_0-jpeg

My photo is taken in the intersection of 5th avenue and Broadway, the same spot portrayed in Hassam’s Spring Morning in the Heart of the City. The principles of detection told me where to take the photo based on the angle of the red building at the center of the painting, behind the tree, as well as the the clock by the sidewalk. My photo is similar to the painting in the perspective and angles from which it is shot and the positioning of the red building and trees. The painting seems to have been painted through a higher vantage point which accounts for the discrepancy in the relationships between the clock and the red building, though i matched them up as best i could. The street is slightly different, now it is paved in the middle to desperate two lanes, and the pillared building in the left are not there anymore. Most obviously there are many new buildings, stands, and posts in the photo and some buildings seem to have changed (like behind the red building) or been painted differently than they appeared however, the clock, sidewalk, park, trees, and red building, are all very similar to how they were painted.

(i hope its alright i used two paintings, i was passing by 5th and roadway in a taxi and couldn’t resist making the attempt)

9/3 Questions; Self-Portrait

1. The meaning of art is in the eye of the beholder and/or the creator. It is the combination of variables such as skill, creativity, imagination, emotion, and intellect (though the list is virtually endless), into a form. The meaning of that form depends on who is deriving it. To some the meaning is aesthetic, and the form’s beauty moves them, while to others it is intellectual and they are moved by the idea the form provokes.
2. My favorite type of art is painting. I am captivated by the infinite number of techniques that can be used to paint a picture as well as how unique those techniques can be to the artist. It allows one to pour his heart and soul out with so many options such as color choice, texture and use of perspective. Anything one can imagine can be depicted and there are so many channels through which to do so.
3. My favorite period is the Renaissance because it was in such stark contrast to the period before. The middle ages were so restrictive to artists and the renaissance was a period with virtually no boundaries. All that pent-up creativity exploded into a period that features some of man’s greatest works of art, and certainly art that speaks to me.
4. My academic strength is my analytical skills. I enjoy evaluating things and breaking those things down into parts to better understand them or better define them. For that reason the classes that interest me most in academia tend to be law or politics related.
5. I feel very comfortable with technologies given the resources to understand them. In this era of technology we live in, new technologies are springing up all the time and adaptability is crucial. I enjoy keeping up with the latest technology related media trends and integrating them into my own life.
6. I think my writing skills are good, though they could use work. Works that require a short period of time to write are difficult for me because I am a slow writer but I am very often proud of what I produce if given adequate time.

photo-on-2009-09-09-at-12-56