Visual Archive Reflection

I’ve been thinking a lot about my visual archive and what the particular images that I ended up selecting mean for me and my aesthetic interests. I deliberately approached the project with no preconceived intentions of what to select, and simply wanted to see which images I naturally gravitate towards and hopefully discern some sort of meaning behind these choices. The result was interesting and in my opinion, reflects the particular influences that have shaped who I am as a person.
I combed through hundreds of images on stock image sites, Google, and online albums I had saved and selected the first 100 that caught my eye. From what I chose, I was able to discern 6 distinct themes:

1. Movement
2. “Art around Town”
3. Text as Art
4. Technology in Design
5. Science as Art
6. Geometrics

(I think it is also important to note that I didn’t choose all of these images at once, but over the length of the course. The “Science as Art” selections are influenced by our visit to the Neuroscience lab, but several of the the “Science as Art” and “Geometrics” images were chosen prior to this visit.)

I’ve come to see that I gravitate towards images that are heavily science- and math-based, which, although I have always consider myself more of a creative person than a scientific one, is fitting due to my personal background. I come from an entire family of engineers (mostly electrical /chemical), and I definitely prefer imagery that has a specific, logical structure to its composition.

My “Text as Art” choices stood out to me when we shared our Armory images in class, as the majority of the ones I selected from the show had some kind of printed message on them. It’s not so much the idea of font that appeals to me, but the messages that are printed tend to be ironic, witty or thought-provoking phrases. I think typography in itself is certainly an art form – and usually a structured one at that – but for me the message is more important.

As a dancer, the “movement” selections are the least surprising to me of the choices I made. I have always gravitated towards patterns and shapes created by moving subjects (and as odd as it may sound, I think in “movement” terms at times – when listening to songs, recollecting a conversation, or even in terms of writing a paper, if that makes sense. I am constantly aware of how elements “flow” with one another, and even if I can’t articulate why, it’s usually the main factor that influences my though processes.) I particularly like “Seed Culture” (Movement image #7) and “Cross Point” (#11) because of the directions that your eyes are drawn to taking when looking at these – although one is straight and the other very curvilinear, both offer deliberate, structured focal points.

Lastly, it is surprising to me that very few of my images have people as their subjects – and when they do, they usually are not facing the camera. For me, a human subject is less about portraiture and more about the structures they create within the composition; sharp, angular lines and shapes are prevalent in these images as well.

Perhaps I am more science-oriented than I thought!

The Art/Science Connection

Reflecting on this course post-class sessions, it is clear to me why I was drawn to taking this course in the first place! Rarely have I had the opportunity to integrate science and technology into courses I have taken on art history, and it fascinating to me that this art/science connection is so strong for me, even though I hardly recognized it beforehand.

Our second class trip was to the Columbia University neuroscience lab. To be honest, I was initially unsure of the connection between an image culture course and neuroscience, and thus had no preconceived expectations for this class session. Although I was obviously aware that microscopes create useful images for scientists, I wondered how they would translate to our two weekends. This visit unexpectedly tied in a number of themes that not only emerged from my own art and image preferences, but also my initial hopes for the course to understand the impact of visual culture beyond the art realm.

We began our visit with an overview by Dan Stettler, a researcher in the facility who focus on the olfactory and visual sensory receptors of the brain. He presented a shorter version of a lecture/slide presentation that would be given to other researchers involved in similar study, but adapted for our course. I vaguely followed the discussion on neurological responses and molecule mapping (drudging up my high school biology and chemistry memories!), but I ultimately understood that neuroscience, like several other fields of study, ultimately rely heavily on the ability to market itself for funding and publication purposes. In other words, while Stettler and his colleagues were interested in making new scientific discoveries, they also relied heavily upon capturing aesthetically compelling images to convey the importance of their work to funders or publishers, hoping to grab their attention and earn their support. Even the analytical, logical-minded fields of study rely heavily upon the creative and aesthetic components that an image can provide to market themselves within the field.



We also had the opportunity to tour the facilities and observe the tools used in the researchers' everyday work. Each of these tools provided the researchers with a different vantage point for observing, analyzing and manipulating their specimens in varying ways. Thus the ability to create and manipulate images is vital to success in the sciences, not just in terms of marketing but in the actual research itself. Art and Science are certainly deeply integrated, which I think often is ignored or unknown in each respective field. Too often we have to make a choice for one or the other (how often do you hear about public schools struggling with funding to first cut their art programs, and stressing the importance of keeping the sciences?), which in reality seems to be a nearly impossible task. How often would researchers miss ("filter?") the potential for important discoveries if their ability to create and manipulate images was nonexistent? My guess is the neuroscience field would change dramatically - or disappear as we know it all together - if digital imaging was unavailable.

(Thanks to Dan and his colleagues for giving us an extensive tour of the labs!)

Visual Archive is Up

Check out my visual archive:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ldb2120/sets

I've grouped them into sets by themes...very interesting to me, which I'll explain in a later post.

Images: Virtuosi between Being and Not-Being

Our class presentations got me thinking about the varied ways that we read and process images in visual culture, and what factors or characteristics influence those methods. How much of what we bring to the process of spectatorship subsequently influences what we see and its apparent “inherent” value? Conversely, how much of what surrounds us informs our opinions on value, and then in turn guides us in the future when determining value? The layers that factor into the object/spectator relationship seem potentially infinite.

I was thinking about this as I prepared for my in-class discussion on Reinhard Brandt’s “Images - Virtuosi between Being and Not-Being” article. I chose to present this because his style seemed to have a very logical approach to me (as logical as theoretical art discussion can be, I suppose!), which I appreciated. While his approach may have seemed logical, however, there was nothing logical – at least in my understanding of images in today’s society – about the concepts presented in his argument.

Brandt makes the case that “what I see and recognize in or on an image is not actually there.” People view certain objects as images, and he choose to reflect upon what he calls the “inner being/not-being” of these objects. In the science world, the artificial creation of images has become a commonly utilized practice in order to simulate practical, cognitive and emotive situations for study. But what exactly is an image? Brandt differentiates between that which is visible, and that which permits us to view the visible. In other words, when we see a chair in a room, there is the color, outline, and texture of the chair, but it is the actual “non-being” chair that this visible image reflects. What we recognize as a chair is not actually there.

While a bit difficult to wrap my brain around, I found Brandt’s article to be fascinating on many levels. For one, I assumed that this type of analysis would be largely limited to things like religious concepts, where the artist depicting a religious figure is not actually making the determination of whether that figure exists or not. The fact that a lot of Brandt’s argument discussed everyday objects, like chairs, was not something I had ever really considered as comprised of these two separate “components. “ That being said, however, I do agree with his statement that there is – and has always been – an emotional value to images, and that the knowledge that an actual image is separate from that which is depicted does not change the fact that we, as viewers, elicit specific emotions and responses when seeing these “non-images.” Would these responses be different - perhaps more removed from a viewer/object connection? – if we believed a chair in front of us wasn’t “actually” there?

The Armory Show: An Image-Filter Exercise

Our visit to this year’s Armory Show here in New York City was only the second time I have ever attended this event. On the whole, I was very interested in the selections this year – the range of work was truly intriguing, different, and creative. This was the first time I have gone to an art exhibition with a camera though, which turned out to be a great exercise for several reasons.
I came prepared to the show ready to “take pictures of the works I liked,” as instructed. With thousands of people milling around and observing, however, this task was not as easy as I had anticipated. Waiting for the right moment to take a picture without others walking into the image became a complicated task. Several of my images from that day (though not the ones I ultimately selected for my visual archive) captured people within the frame – sometimes images of me observing them while they look at the art, sometimes capturing people dismiss the art they pass. In retrospect I wish I had saved more of these images from that day, as it seems to speak directly to the idea of one’s “image filtering” that we discussed later in class. The reasoning behind why one person gravitates towards a particular image can be completely different than that of the next person, but it is clear that the bombardment of images in our everyday lives has taught us to refine “filters” for selecting imagery with specific characteristics.

Highlights of the images that made it through my “filters”:







The third one in particular grabbed my eye because I enjoyed the humorous play it was taking on the original Degas sculpture, one which I have been familiar with since I was a child. I think I am drawn to works that have an inherent humor/irony to them, whether through their particular composition or written text in the work. (Update: This is certainly clear after reviewing my visual archive - see later post!)


What was great about this exercise was that it truly allowed me to solely focus on the works existing as images, rather than approach them as a potential collector. In other words, never once did I look at a piece of artwork, consider its price, and then decide if I liked it – every piece was presented to me as though they all began on an equal playing field. An impressive exhibition of works, even if the purpose was in reality a primarily commercial one.

Welcome to My Blog

If you've stumbled here, this blog will be discussing the themes and ideas covered in a graduate-level course on Image Culture. Feel free to share your thoughts and reactions!

Expectations

I am currently in my last semester in the Arts Administration program here at Teachers College. Although my undergraduate background is in art history and film studies, my primary interests have been in the performing arts, specifically dance and theater. I am currently writing my thesis, entitled "Dancing Towards the Future: Audience Development During an Economic Recession," which will discuss several themes of audience engagement, one of which being the growing importance of emerging media and imagery. I am looking forward to learning how the intersection of image culture and new technologies are playing a critical role in developing new audiences for art.

By taking this course, I hope to have a stronger sense not only of how image culture effects our perceptions, but also how they influence our decisions and interests. I think it is important to be conscious of the power of images and iconography in our culture, and am looking forward to learning how this applies to other fields beyond the arts.