TRIAL EXAM POST-MORTEM – notes
READ THIS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE POWERPOINT of the same name,
which has images to go with these notes.
General comments.
It is VERY important to consider the timing of each question. Follow the
suggestions. Don’t spend half an hour on the first question…remember it’s
only worth 5 marks. Give attention where it needs to go. Even if you don’t
feel confident with writing the essay, make sure you give yourself 45
minutes to work with it.
Q1: How does Salvatore Zofrea’s print The Death of my Grandfather
represent ideas of loss and suffering?
A: This question was mostly answered well. You needed to include the following:
Use of black and white, with no other colours: the effect is one of starkness;
harshness; rawness. It concentrates our attention on the image…we are not
distracted by colour.
The large tonal variation, or contrast between dark and light. We know this
adds drama.
Mark-making. The lines are strong and there is little modelling of the figures.
They are simplified. This adds to a sense of authenticity, honesty, simplicity.
This is typical of the woodblock print and was used by Expressionists a lot. (e.g
Kollwitz; Munch.) We may recall the Expressionist artists were involved with the
subjective; the personal; the internal. They used primitive looking modelling,
strong lines, strong colours.
The woodblock print as a medium was used by the Japanese, however the look
was different.
Placement and posture or pose of figures:




Central placement of the dead grandfather, indicating significance.
Posture of the grandfather reminiscent of crucified Christ figure.
Family members radiating out like spokes from a hub.
Note none of them actually looking at the Grandfather. This indicates to us
that they are all taken up with their own emotion.
 Even though the scene is crowded, they are lost in their own thoughts.
They are in fact, all alone, each one of them. This is the effect of loss and
grief.
**************************
Q2: Compare how each artist has interpreted the everyday world in their
artwork. (Isidro Blasco & Charles Condor.)
A: Most students focussed well on the keyword – compare. Also, you generally
focussed on the phrase ‘everyday world’.
Blasco’s work has a 3D aspect, and Jessie called it a sculpture – good comment.
Strong sense of structure: - an emphasis on lines throughout the work, and
beyond it to the exposed timber legs; and the layered effect of the works. This is
reminiscent of the built environment, and this is a significant aspect of the work.
To return to the question’s phrasing then, we would say: Blasco is showing us
a world that is highly structured; where the buildings are of primary importance.
The world Condor is showing us is much more concerned with the open air;
water, and space. Yes there are many structures described within his work but
there is much more space and openness. More light can get in.
Blasco’s perspectives are multiple and a bit dizzying, a bit fish-eye.
This can be related back to the idea of postmodernism that there are always
competing viewpoints; always many points of view. No one view is correct.
There are others to consider. Also reminiscent of Cubism and collage effects.
What effect does this have? It tends to feel contemporary to us, modern. This
busy environment is something we are very familiar with.
It ends up immersing us in the environment;
Makes us feel small. The buildings are huge and tower up on each side. So there
is an effect of scale.
Again, relate back to question’s phrasing: he makes us feel like we’re being
immersed in the courtyard environment; that we are small, perhaps a child. He
could be remembering his childhood experiences. It is a world that is crowded,
crazy.
By contrast, Condor’s perspective is a single view, elevated and to the side.
(This is a typical Japanese perspective and 19th century artists were, we know,
influenced by Japanese art – see Hiroshige image in PowerPoint. ) He is showing
us a world of activity – the busy port – and an event of social importance. People
are going away travelling on a boat. The people we can see are well-dressed and
there are family groups on the concourse. It is an optimistic scene.
Blasco has used vivid colours which make an energetic, and again,
contemporary image. Condor’s colours are much more muted and subtle,
although there is colour in the water in particular. We are much more aware of
the elements in Condor’s image. It is impacting on the figures in the image and
forms a large part of the image.
We could say that both artists are interested in the effects of light in their
world. For Blasco, the light is at the top of these canyon walls, where the
buildings are accentuated. For Condor, he is interested in capturing the effects of
ephemeral light, as was typical of the Impressionist painters of this period. In
particular the light on the water, the sky, the concourse. This emphasises the
passing nature of the everyday world. It is a dynamic world. Things are changing.
Each artist shows us different modes of transport – for Blasco it is the push
bike. For Condor it is the steam-powered ship. Also each artist shows us the
architecture of their particular world. For Blasco, it is crowded and
impoverished. For Condor, it is much grander and better established and bigger.
With regard to technology, Blasco is using 3-D photographs to give us an
immersive effect. Condor was using the technology of his time also. The painttube was invented mid 19th century, and made plein air painting possible.
***********************************************
Q3: Examine the influences of contemporary culture on the artistic practices
of Jeff Koons.
A: Most of you were careful to refer to all the source material, including the
image of him in his studio and his comment.
The subjects he has used: Note, it’s not enough to just observe that he has
used MJ and a balloon dog. You need to add something like: Koon’s subject
matter - MJ and a balloon dog - are both instantly recognisable as contemporary
subjects.
You need to go on to say what they are, e.g.: Michael Jackson was an international
contemporary pop star, and the balloon dog is something we’ve all seen at
festivals or circuses etc. With the MJ sculpture, he has included MJ’s pet monkey.
You could add something like: not only has Koons used contemporary cultural
images, but it seems that, like Pop Art in the 20th century, contemporary
culture is his subject. That’s what he is describing to us; that’s what he’s
interested in. That’s what his art is about. That is the theme of his work here.
Conceptual Framework: Jacob noted that he is also investigating the
relationship of another artist (Jackson) and HIS world.
Material he’s used: Several of you noted the use of porcelain, a traditional and
expensive material. This indicates to us that MJ is being treated as someone
special; perhaps fragile. The use of gold paint has traditionally used for pictures
of the Holy Family or royalty / nobility. So again, the use of materials indicates
that the subject is meant to be regarded as someone very special, even perhaps
holy. This is a comment upon the way MJ was seen by his many fans. HOWEVER,
Graham noted that porcelain figurines are now available cheaply and as tacky
items. This is an interesting contradiction, then. Again, this is characteristic of
postmodernism.
With the balloon dog, he has used a modern industrial material, stainless steel
with vivid colours. This reflects the contemporary, mass-produced culture we
live in. In fact this effect is totally illusionistic – it looks just like a balloon.
The pose of the figures: the pose, especially with the monkey, is reminiscent of
a Madonna and child pose. Again Koons is commenting upon contemporary
views – the ‘worship’ of celebrities like MJ. So he has used parody and irony here
to make a comment.
Use of scale: he has used scale to give the balloon dog a great significance. Scale
has been used traditionally to indicate importance,– for instance bronze statues
of important historical figures, etc. or even Gothic cathedrals -and with
contemporary work to emphasise our physical insignificance in relation to
something. It makes us become more aware of our physical selves (eg Christo &
Jeanne-Claude’s work.)
We see scale used a lot with modern ‘super-heroes’, who we see in the photo
of Koon’s studio. Several of you mentioned those posters, which is good. Again,
these super heroes are like modern gods in our culture.
Location/ Context: The balloon dog is located in Versailles Palace. This is
traditionally a place associated with French Royalty and with great wealth.
(Where did we see Versailles featured the other day? With Michael Zavros’s
painting of the bench-press in a Versailles room. See PowerPoint.)
It is also associated with magnificent works of art. So to put this balloon animal
in with great works of art is an ironic comment, perhaps on the objects we hold
as precious or valuable in our contemporary world.
A dog in the palace: the idea of a dog running around amongst all the valuable
artworks. It’s like he’s giving the bird to the traditional, valuable artworks and
tradition. So in a way he’s celebrating pop culture, and in a way he’s commenting
on how brazen it is.
His comment: We can see f rom Koon’s comments that it was important for him
to talk about his own world within his works. His world, like ours, is a world of
mass production and mass consumption. Both his artworks reflect this.
Photo of him in his studio: He is not the sole practitioner – he works in
collaboration with others to bring his work into being. This is a common feature
of contemporary art, e.g. Christo and Jeanne-Claude; Sol LeWitt; Janet Laurence
He has the ideas behind the work. We could call him the ‘conceptual director’ of
his work.
**************************************************
ESSAY QUESTIONS.
QUESTION 6: ‘It’s the viewers which make the pictures.’ – Marcel Duchamp,
artist. Discuss how artists and audiences communicate with each other.
(Jacob, Chloe, Clare.)
Actually, this question is trickier than it looks at first, because part of our answer
must be to consider what we can say about the audience’s response.
Sentence 1: refer to the question….What did Duchamp mean by this quote?
He was interested in taking the emphasis away from the artist as manipulator of
materials, or some especially talented individual, and getting audiences to
wrestle with the ideas that he offered about art. He was asking for a more active
role on the part of the audience. We may recall he signed works with a false
signature, (R.L. Mutt) and created an ‘alter ego’ – Rrose Selavy (himself dressed
up as a woman.)
He emphasised the exchange of ideas as the actual place where the art
occurred. He declared he was not interested in an art that was merely ‘retinal’ –
that is, was merely good to look at. He wanted art to do more. We could add an
example of one of Duchamp’s pieces here: e.g. Fountain, 1917 – a men’s urinal
turned on its side, and signed with a false signature which in itself was a pun on
the plumbing store he bought the urinal from. (JL Mott.)
The organisers of the exhibition (who are an audience, they qualify as an
audience) were horrified and hid the piece behind a screen. They wanted to
censor the art; prevent it from being seen by the greater public. This then, is an
example of the audience responding to the work!!!!
Duchamp was raising the question – does the context where we discover the
object make it art or not art? This was questioning the gallery space. He was
throwing a challenge to the audience. It required an audience to be part of the
equation though.
Sentence 2: Who is the audience? Not one single group. …can be the person in
the street; or the gallery; or a critic or historian; or curators; bureaucrats or
officials; other artists; or technical assistants – anyone who actually sees or
interacts with the work in some way.
Traditionally, the Church and the Nobility were the patrons of artists. They
determined what kind of art could be produced. They were an audience who had
great influence on the artist’s work, with their feedback etc.
The Salon and response to Manet’s work back in 19th century. The Salon is
an example of the audience (people with power, in this case) determining what
kind of art is being produced. If you wanted to get into the Salon, you would have
to produce certain type of art.
Manet caused a storm of controversy and was refused entry of his work to the
Salon at one point. This (as Clare said) probably acted to increase his profile
because the public, and some critics were scandalised (and people love to be
scandalised.) We may recall Manet didn’t understand the response he got.
He ended up exhibiting his work independently, and this started a trend towards
a greater variety of venues for people to see art….the monopoly of the Salon was
being broken.
Following Duchamp, other artists emphasised ideas rather than an art
object and in doing so, helped shift the focus from the art on to how the
audience thought about the art.
Conceptual artists in the 20th century were interested in ideas and threw out a
challenge to their audiences.
Joseph Kosuth with his 1960s piece: ‘Titled: art as idea as idea” was simply a
definition of the word ‘water’, photocopied and stuck on a board. What was he
doing here? Asking us, i.e .the audience, to consider what art was, and where it
was located.
Andy Warhol – was one of those who challenged us to question the art object by
his use of industrially-produced multiples (removing the artist’s hand) and his
appropriation of contemporary cultural images, and often celebrities. He
achieved notoriety for his lifestyle, and his works were, in his lifetime, selling for
huge amounts. (The paying audience were communicating!!)
His work was controversial though, as some felt it was tasteless, cynical, and
tacky. Many critics agreed. He used collaborators on his work. Jeff Koons is very
much like Warhol. HAND OUT
Contemporary art often involves an acknowledged awareness of the
audience.
Christo and Jeanne-Claude created art that could not be seen as a commodity
but rather something to be experienced. They were interested in embedding
their art out in the community, and by their own words, ‘bringing joy and beauty’
to people. Their artwork involves getting permissions to create the work in
certain public places. We know that often, this permission was refused. Again,
this is an example of an audience (a specific audience, that is, the bureaucracy)
responding to the work.
Barbara Kruger – postmodernist who comments on the way we behave in
society, especially matters of consumption; feminism. Her artworks involve the
audience in a direct way. She uses text in her artworks, literally talking to her
audience in her artworks, addressing us as ‘you’. She often accuses us of
something or makes us feel guilty, or at least more aware, of what we do. For
example: ‘Your gaze hits the side of my face’, 1981. This piece is referring to the
‘male gaze’ which is implied in traditional art. The audience is assumed to be
straight male.
Also, she typically presents her work, not in a gallery but to a much wider
audience, i.e. the passing public, as she uses billboards.
Also, she has her work printed onto coffee cups and retail merchandise. We the
audience collaborate with her by buying her stuff.
Imants Tillers: his widespread appropriation of other artist’s work (“quoting”)
is a form of communicating with that particular audience (as well as those who
view his work.)
Famously, in the 1980s, Tillers started quoting work from Indigenous artists. He
did so, from his own admission, without recognising the protocols and spiritual
significance and context of Indigenous art. Certain symbols in indigenous art
have taboos associated with them – only people from certain tribes can paint
certain symbols. There was a great deal of controversy in the art world about
this. Aboriginal art at that time was NOT postmodern…there was not an
acknowledgement of different viewpoints, different peoples, different contexts.
Indigenous people were for the first time painting canvases as permanent
images rather than ephemeral ones. This has changed…more on this next week.
Since then, Tillers has reconciled with the Jakamarra and they have collaborated
on some works.
Janet Laurence’s work has a political edge – this means she is interested in
making audiences aware of ecological issues; of the fragility of our world. Her
works often involve many of our senses – for instance, the immersive fog in her
‘In the shadow’ installation at Homebush Bay, which also involves us walking
through her installation which extends over 100 metres along the creek. We
breathe in and feel the intermittent fog on our skin. We would also be hearing
the birds and possibly frogs, ie the wildlife that is being attracted to the site. So
our physical bodies are involved with the work.
Antony Gormley: His work often involves the collaboration of many people. E.g.
His ‘Asian Field’, 2006 involved people from a village in China making his little
figures in terra cotta. These people were an audience of sorts, and were paid to
create these small figures. Each one would have been different, and deliberately
out of the artist’s control – just like Sol LeWitt’s wall drawings.
Then we as viewers are another tier of audience. He wanted to get us as viewers
to face this massive number of figures, all small but occupying a huge space. So
there are important elements of scale involved with the audience’s interaction.
Public Galleries (like AGNSW) and governments take note of how many
people attend exhibitions, and funding for these shows (and payment of artists
etc) is based on how much interest the various exhibitions provoke. They strike a
balance between shows which are going to be very popular, and shows which
may be historically significant; or educational; or challenging.
Commercial Galleries, by contrast, are more interested in selling artworks as a
business enterprise. They are interested in promoting the work of artists who
are likely to be popular with many people.
Jacob noted that Social media as a way that contemporary artists get feedback
about their work.
Clare noted that the use of controversial subjects, such as explicit themes, or
objectification of women, is likely to raise the profile of an artwork and an artist.
They will get more publicity that way.
Chloe noted that with say Sol LeWitt’s work, there is no meaning as such – there
is no message in the work or symbolism, but this leaves the audience free to
respond how they like.
These are all good comments. We could add:
Public Art Competitions: Public art pieces, like Laurence’s installations in both
Homebush and the Domain (Veil of Trees) and at the Museum of Sydney (Edge of
the Trees) are often chosen as part of a competition process. So artists have to
work to a Brief, and submit concept models of their work to a judging panel. If
they get selected, then they actually create the work.
The audience in this instance is the judging panel, and eventually it will be
the public. With her work ‘Water Veil’, in the building in Melbourne, it will be the
people who work in this building that form her audiences.
Our purchase of these works is an audience response to her work.
We also respond to work when we attend exhibitions; buy catalogues; read
blogs, magazines, and newspapers where there are articles written by
critics etc.
Interesting clip about art and audiences in Tasmania:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-03/galleries-doing-well-from-monaeffect/4239678?section=entertainment
****************************************************