Though I am not a huge fan of Kandinsky in the formal sense, I do love his method of inspiration and expression from music. I think most artists are inspired by music, including myself. Sound and color have similar emotive reactions, from which Kandinsky draws from in his work. It seems as though each painting is a visual representation of the music that inspired him and was meant to be a visual journey for the viewer.
I find myself closing my eyes and grasping an emotional feeling in order to create something that is aesthetically moving. By adding music of a certain genre (classical, industrial, electronic, r&b), I am usually pushed towards a certain mood, reflected in my art. When designing a cd cover or band poster, there must be a certain look that evokes the mood of the music that the viewer can automatically connect with. The beauty of music as an inspiration is that both the music and art produced from it can be interpreted in many ways.
Kandinsky is one of my favorite artists. I agree with Bianca in that his paintings are visual representations of the musical compositions that served as his inspiration, especially Wagner’s Lohengrin. Instead of presenting a simply narrative for the audience, Kandinsky’s paintings act as in-depth landscapes the viewer must travel through. It is not enough to simply look at one of his paintings; one must feel it. He often uses basic shapes and patterns repetitiously for his paintings, just as the greatest musical compositions are constructed from the same simple notes and tonal patterns. I believe his greatest work is Composition VII. This piece is extremely complex, and the meaning the viewer takes from it is largely dependent on the emotions the viewer is feeling. It can be a joyous painting or a frenzied one, just as the same piece of music can have different interpretations. Kandinsky’s genius is evident in how he bridges the gap between music and art. Many art pieces suggest a particular type of music that could accompany it, and music is linked to artistic styles. Kandinsky does not suggest a liaison, but rather explicitly paints pieces of music.
I particularly like the spook level of Magritte’s work, very eerie and makes your eye think twice at what it is processing, then causes your mind to ask it’s self if an image like that is possible. The picture with him looking into the mirror and he is seeing the back of his head is something that makes me wonder: what is his face really look like? Why did he choose to do a perfect reflection but still show his back to the viewers eye? It is very entertaining for me. the video of holy mountain is something that comes off just as creepy as did marittes work but on a different level, very visual and is definitely pushing the limits of film at the time period. Jan Svanmajer bizarre film is extremely interesting to me, the use of clay and hands in this film tied into the crazy movements and wild screen play makes me laugh and at the same time causes me to really think about what is going on. something visually uncommon and i think that is the reason why it causes me to be so intrigued.
The Monument to the Third International aka Taitlin’s Tower was intended to honor the end of the Bolshevik revolution and to serve as the headquarters of the Cominter (communist international or Third International – an international communist organization founded in Moscow). It was to be a fusion of geometries: pyramid, helix, cube, sphere, cylinder, etc. The design was too advanced for its time. This piece of architecture as seen by some as the epitome of constructivism and indeed strongly represents the stance that art should be geared toward a social/political purpose. Even so, it was not very feasible by design. It would have been a difficult task to obtain the quantity of necessary materials (steel, glass, and iron) to build this model.
I believe that Magritte’s work is ingenious. His clever use of elements that shock and stun the viewer makes his artwork enjoyable and fun. I do not like realistic art but his added sense of humor is appreciated. Art has so many various forms (painting, poetry, film making etc...) for artists to express their opinion of a wide variety of topics, from personal to political. From looking at artwork it’s sometimes clear to interpret or decipher the message portrayed (if any). I do not know any famous artists personally that we have studied bout, but I wonder which one of the artist’s personality parallel their works genre and themes. I would have loved to be able to meet Magritte because from his work he seems like a witty and clever man. But on the other hand maybe his personality didn’t parallel the type of man I would portray him as. I believe knowing the artist of artwork you are viewing is special cause not only can you interpret it yourself, but you can experience and understand the journey that the artist took.
One post I especially like was the work done by Wasilly Kandinsky. What caught my attention the most was his use of vibrant color and space. Looking at Kandinsky’s abstract work it is clear that his artwork is derived from inner thoughts as well as his devotion to inner beauty. One painting I particularly like by Kandinsky is “The Blue Rider.” Kandinsky creates an image in which the horse is prominent, however, it is blurred and not clearly defined. Because the painting is not so clear, I like how the viewer is given an opportunity to try to find everything that is in the piece. Another painting I love is Composition VIII. It’s complexity and the use of wide spectrum of colors is astounding. It is easy to notice a sense of geometric rhythm and Kandinsky plays special attention to the form and lines. The background also adds dynamism to the composition and the layered background colors give the composition depth. Kandinsky’s work clearly shows what a spiritual and deep man he really is, and is artwork is greatly admired.
Like some earlier posts commented, it is interesting to see how artists find inspiration in each others work whether its music inspired by a painting or a painting inspired by a composition or opera. This is especially important when you consider that several centuries earlier most art was inspired / commissioned by the religious institution or commissioned by the court or a wealthy patron. There was defiantly a massive freedom and evoking of the human spirit in these works.
The portrait of Vladimir Mayakovsky attracted my attention in the first sight. He was very famous in China as a poet. In this image, Vladimir is wearing a dark suit, with red shirts inside. Maybe this symbolized his personality: a warm, flaming heart underneath his cold appearance. From his eyes, we can see the rebelling spirit, and revolution animosity. Vladimir Mayakovsky's life consists of four important parts: poems, plays, revolution, and love. These four elements twist with each other. He is deeply influenced by Russian revolutions, and his literary works are a way for him to express his passions, opinions, dreams, and against towards enemies. His love affair with a married woman, to some extent, reflects his resistance against conventions. Finally, frustrated in love, alienated from society, attacked by critics in the press, and denied to travel abroad, Mayakovsky committed suicide in Moscow.
I really liked the portrait of Vladimir Mayakovsky. The colours were vibrant and catches your attention. The stare entrances you and holds, almost commands your attention. Mayakovsky was an amazing poet which most likely influenced his pieces. His affair with a married woman strongly influenced his works during those years. He used his poetry to express what what was going on in his life. It was I'm sure very cathardic for him. A way of expressing his feelings and opinions about what was going on around him and in his life.He wrote about love, revolution, religion and art from the vantage point of a spurned lover. His many travels influenced his work greatly, but his influence cannot be limited to soviet poetry alone, he also changed the perceptions in wider 20th century culture.
Die Stijl is a style that does not appeal to me. The idea of a religious/philosophical search for “clarity and order” conjures the images of Buddhist mandalas. In contrast, the images of this movement give me a sense of constraint and uneasiness rather than “equilibrium and harmony.” The same can be said for constructivism and its architecture. The materials compose a very cold, vacuous form that is detached and furthest from nature.
Of this time period, I agree with Elizabeth and prefer the work of Paul Klee. His images seem to be the warmer counterpart to Die Stijl. Although the pieces are still abstract and comprised of geometric shapes, the compositions are freer (he does not restrict himself to straight lines). Also, Klee utilized attractive color schemes and was able to expand his audience with the addition of representational images.
I really enjoyed all of the movie posts of this week. Movies are a very important form of the visual and auditory arts of today. Most of the movies presented in class were more so meant to be artist that to carry the type of meaning most movies today carry with intricate plots and engaging characters. Yet, this artistic style is still present in some mainstream movies. Take for example writer/director Darren Aronofsky, who’s known for movies such as “Requiem for a Dream” and “The Fountain”. Both if these movies require the viewer to look beyond dialogue and the explicit message and find artistic interpretation of the films. When we were shown “The Holy Mountain” it reminded me of Darren’s movies and it was a perfect example of how motion picture arts have evolved over time.
I think Malevich's works really caught my attention. For his time, I absolutely think his way of working looked very postmodern and interesting. It may seem really simple to just do random squares on a white background, but I think that that idea of coming up with that type of design is the important. His work is very vibrant and playful, and very appealing to look at in my opinion. I think I really enjoy this type of design, in which simple shapes are arranged in a very clean and simple way. Also, in a way similar to his style, Kandinsky’s work also appealed to me a lot. I definitely think his creative and abstract geometric shapes, use of color, space, everything, makes you look at art in a new and different way.
Dadaism, is one of the most interesting and influencing cultural movements. Whether in literature, theatre or in graphic design, it sure passionately effected politics, art, and culture during World War 1. Dada activities inspired, and affected peoples life style. It has not only influenced later styles like avant-garde, music, pop art, surrealism and such.. but dadaists are also the groundwork of abstract art and poetry. I believe, it had and still has such a great impact on today's art culture and the designers. What I like most about this movement is; Dadaism's way of not being art but being "anti-art." For everything that art stood for, Dada was to represent the opposite such as ignoring the aesthetics. Dadaism's main goal was to appeal to sensibilities and intend to offend. I think this is what art should be like. Conveying the truth in any way to appeal to sensibilities. Art keeps itself alive with offending, reaching, conveying, unique, influencing,and inspiring while being open to critiques.
Wassily Kandinsky is a really inspiring figure, and such an influencial artist for the abstract expressionists here in America. I think its interesting how he studied the art movements of his time, like Fauvism & bauhaus, and was inspired by them, but yet never fully committed himself to any; he always maintained his individual artistic voice. His upbringing in Russia was always something that came back to him. I read somewhere that as a child, he dreamt of a blue horseback rider; this would go on to be a recurring theme in his artwork for the rest of his life and also the reason behind the 1912 exposition "Blue Rider".
I think music and art continue to have a symbiotic relationship. These days, artists like Christian Marcalay and bands like Sonic Youth keep alive the tradition that Wassily Kandinsky began a century ago.
14 comments:
Though I am not a huge fan of Kandinsky in the formal sense, I do love his method of inspiration and expression from music. I think most artists are inspired by music, including myself. Sound and color have similar emotive reactions, from which Kandinsky draws from in his work. It seems as though each painting is a visual representation of the music that inspired him and was meant to be a visual journey for the viewer.
I find myself closing my eyes and grasping an emotional feeling in order to create something that is aesthetically moving. By adding music of a certain genre (classical, industrial, electronic, r&b), I am usually pushed towards a certain mood, reflected in my art. When designing a cd cover or band poster, there must be a certain look that evokes the mood of the music that the viewer can automatically connect with. The beauty of music as an inspiration is that both the music and art produced from it can be interpreted in many ways.
Kandinsky is one of my favorite artists. I agree with Bianca in that his paintings are visual representations of the musical compositions that served as his inspiration, especially Wagner’s Lohengrin. Instead of presenting a simply narrative for the audience, Kandinsky’s paintings act as in-depth landscapes the viewer must travel through. It is not enough to simply look at one of his paintings; one must feel it. He often uses basic shapes and patterns repetitiously for his paintings, just as the greatest musical compositions are constructed from the same simple notes and tonal patterns. I believe his greatest work is Composition VII. This piece is extremely complex, and the meaning the viewer takes from it is largely dependent on the emotions the viewer is feeling. It can be a joyous painting or a frenzied one, just as the same piece of music can have different interpretations. Kandinsky’s genius is evident in how he bridges the gap between music and art. Many art pieces suggest a particular type of music that could accompany it, and music is linked to artistic styles. Kandinsky does not suggest a liaison, but rather explicitly paints pieces of music.
I particularly like the spook level of Magritte’s work, very eerie and makes your eye think twice at what it is processing, then causes your mind to ask it’s self if an image like that is possible. The picture with him looking into the mirror and he is seeing the back of his head is something that makes me wonder: what is his face really look like? Why did he choose to do a perfect reflection but still show his back to the viewers eye? It is very entertaining for me. the video of holy mountain is something that comes off just as creepy as did marittes work but on a different level, very visual and is definitely pushing the limits of film at the time period. Jan Svanmajer bizarre film is extremely interesting to me, the use of clay and hands in this film tied into the crazy movements and wild screen play makes me laugh and at the same time causes me to really think about what is going on. something visually uncommon and i think that is the reason why it causes me to be so intrigued.
The Monument to the Third International aka Taitlin’s Tower was intended to honor the end of the Bolshevik revolution and to serve as the headquarters of the Cominter (communist international or Third International – an international communist organization founded in Moscow). It was to be a fusion of geometries: pyramid, helix, cube, sphere, cylinder, etc. The design was too advanced for its time. This piece of architecture as seen by some as the epitome of constructivism and indeed strongly represents the stance that art should be geared toward a social/political purpose. Even so, it was not very feasible by design. It would have been a difficult task to obtain the quantity of necessary materials (steel, glass, and iron) to build this model.
I believe that Magritte’s work is ingenious. His clever use of elements that shock and stun the viewer makes his artwork enjoyable and fun. I do not like realistic art but his added sense of humor is appreciated. Art has so many various forms (painting, poetry, film making etc...) for artists to express their opinion of a wide variety of topics, from personal to political. From looking at artwork it’s sometimes clear to interpret or decipher the message portrayed (if any). I do not know any famous artists personally that we have studied bout, but I wonder which one of the artist’s personality parallel their works genre and themes. I would have loved to be able to meet Magritte because from his work he seems like a witty and clever man. But on the other hand maybe his personality didn’t parallel the type of man I would portray him as. I believe knowing the artist of artwork you are viewing is special cause not only can you interpret it yourself, but you can experience and understand the journey that the artist took.
One post I especially like was the work done by Wasilly Kandinsky. What caught my attention the most was his use of vibrant color and space. Looking at Kandinsky’s abstract work it is clear that his artwork is derived from inner thoughts as well as his devotion to inner beauty. One painting I particularly like by Kandinsky is “The Blue Rider.” Kandinsky creates an image in which the horse is prominent, however, it is blurred and not clearly defined. Because the painting is not so clear, I like how the viewer is given an opportunity to try to find everything that is in the piece. Another painting I love is Composition VIII. It’s complexity and the use of wide spectrum of colors is astounding. It is easy to notice a sense of geometric rhythm and Kandinsky plays special attention to the form and lines. The background also adds dynamism to the composition and the layered background colors give the composition depth. Kandinsky’s work clearly shows what a spiritual and deep man he really is, and is artwork is greatly admired.
René Magritte's surrealist reality was truly absurd but in such a normal, clean, almost Norman Rockwell way. There is a paradox of both humor and a horror to his work. Which was probably a reaction or a representation of the absurdity of life in the early 20-century pre & post World Wars. Like Kandinsky, it seems the work is as originally theoretical or intellectual or philosophical and also confined by that. Of course I'm more inclined to the soft blurred, muted colors of Paul Klee rather than the rich, sharp, jagged images of the other Der Blaue Reiter's like Franz Marc or Kandinsky. For Fran Marc, I'm referring more to his works like Fighting Forms & the Fate of Animals and not so much to the Lamb or The Tower of Blue Horses, which are softer in both color and line.
Like some earlier posts commented, it is interesting to see how artists find inspiration in each others work whether its music inspired by a painting or a painting inspired by a composition or opera. This is especially important when you consider that several centuries earlier most art was inspired / commissioned by the religious institution or commissioned by the court or a wealthy patron. There was defiantly a massive freedom and evoking of the human spirit in these works.
The portrait of Vladimir Mayakovsky attracted my attention in the first sight. He was very famous in China as a poet. In this image, Vladimir is wearing a dark suit, with red shirts inside. Maybe this symbolized his personality: a warm, flaming heart underneath his cold appearance. From his eyes, we can see the rebelling spirit, and revolution animosity.
Vladimir Mayakovsky's life consists of four important parts: poems, plays, revolution, and love. These four elements twist with each other. He is deeply influenced by Russian revolutions, and his literary works are a way for him to express his passions, opinions, dreams, and against towards enemies. His love affair with a married woman, to some extent, reflects his resistance against conventions. Finally, frustrated in love, alienated from society, attacked by critics in the press, and denied to travel abroad, Mayakovsky committed suicide in Moscow.
I really liked the portrait of Vladimir Mayakovsky. The colours were vibrant and catches your attention. The stare entrances you and holds, almost commands your attention. Mayakovsky was an amazing poet which most likely influenced his pieces. His affair with a married woman strongly influenced his works during those years. He used his poetry to express what what was going on in his life. It was I'm sure very cathardic for him. A way of expressing his feelings and opinions about what was going on around him and in his life.He wrote about love, revolution, religion and art from the vantage point of a spurned lover. His many travels influenced his work greatly, but his influence cannot be limited to soviet poetry alone, he also changed the perceptions in wider 20th century culture.
Die Stijl is a style that does not appeal to me. The idea of a religious/philosophical search for “clarity and order” conjures the images of Buddhist mandalas. In contrast, the images of this movement give me a sense of constraint and uneasiness rather than “equilibrium and harmony.” The same can be said for constructivism and its architecture. The materials compose a very cold, vacuous form that is detached and furthest from nature.
Of this time period, I agree with Elizabeth and prefer the work of Paul Klee. His images seem to be the warmer counterpart to Die Stijl. Although the pieces are still abstract and comprised of geometric shapes, the compositions are freer (he does not restrict himself to straight lines). Also, Klee utilized attractive color schemes and was able to expand his audience with the addition of representational images.
I really enjoyed all of the movie posts of this week. Movies are a very important form of the visual and auditory arts of today. Most of the movies presented in class were more so meant to be artist that to carry the type of meaning most movies today carry with intricate plots and engaging characters. Yet, this artistic style is still present in some mainstream movies. Take for example writer/director Darren Aronofsky, who’s known for movies such as “Requiem for a Dream” and “The Fountain”. Both if these movies require the viewer to look beyond dialogue and the explicit message and find artistic interpretation of the films. When we were shown “The Holy Mountain” it reminded me of Darren’s movies and it was a perfect example of how motion picture arts have evolved over time.
I think Malevich's works really caught my attention. For his time, I absolutely think his way of working looked very postmodern and interesting. It may seem really simple to just do random squares on a white background, but I think that that idea of coming up with that type of design is the important. His work is very vibrant and playful, and very appealing to look at in my opinion. I think I really enjoy this type of design, in which simple shapes are arranged in a very clean and simple way. Also, in a way similar to his style, Kandinsky’s work also appealed to me a lot. I definitely think his creative and abstract geometric shapes, use of color, space, everything, makes you look at art in a new and different way.
Dadaism, is one of the most interesting and influencing cultural movements. Whether in literature, theatre or in graphic design, it sure passionately effected politics, art, and culture during World War 1. Dada activities inspired, and affected peoples life style. It has not only influenced later styles like avant-garde, music, pop art, surrealism and such.. but dadaists are also the groundwork of abstract art and poetry.
I believe, it had and still has such a great impact on today's art culture and the designers. What I like most about this movement is; Dadaism's way of not being art but being "anti-art." For everything that art stood for, Dada was to represent the opposite such as ignoring the aesthetics. Dadaism's main goal was to appeal to sensibilities and intend to offend. I think this is what art should be like. Conveying the truth in any way to appeal to sensibilities. Art keeps itself alive with offending, reaching, conveying, unique, influencing,and inspiring while being open to critiques.
Wassily Kandinsky is a really inspiring figure, and such an influencial artist for the abstract expressionists here in America. I think its interesting how he studied the art movements of his time, like Fauvism & bauhaus, and was inspired by them, but yet never fully committed himself to any; he always maintained his individual artistic voice. His upbringing in Russia was always something that came back to him. I read somewhere that as a child, he dreamt of a blue horseback rider; this would go on to be a recurring theme in his artwork for the rest of his life and also the reason behind the 1912 exposition "Blue Rider".
I think music and art continue to have a symbiotic relationship. These days, artists like Christian Marcalay and bands like Sonic Youth keep alive the tradition that Wassily Kandinsky began a century ago.
Post a Comment