Curatorial Creativity Project

While a person’s gender may begin with the assignment of his/her sex based on his/her genital characteristics, the true identity of a person goes beyond biological aspect of gender. This virtual exhibition “Exploring Gender and Identity” features the artists who are not afraid of expressing the complex interrelationships between their identity, body language, and self-expression. They explore the relationships between gender and society. These modern American artists are not the first to do so. However, over the last forty years, they refused to categorize genders as only male and female. They explored questions of transgender, bisexuality, and many other new sexual entities born from the interaction of all mentioned above.

Artists presented in this exhibition, including Kruger, Harris, Greiman, argue that gender is not what truly defines a person. Some artists, such as Sabean ridicule modern stereotypes created by society in a comical way. Some artists, such as Smith, bring up strong messages about some really tough issues different genders have to experience nowadays. Some artists, such as Reimer, Warhol, and Harris, intentionally photograph portraits of themselves wearing ambiguous costumes to emphasize identity roles. Some artists, such as Abramovic and Ulay, try to represent the third entity born from the interaction of male and female energies. All together, these artists create a very powerful social resonance which in some ways helps people to answer questions such as “who am I?” and “where do I belong?”.

See the Curatorial Presentation in Browser

Download the Curatorial Presentation Here

Peter Morgan

(Almost) Good Enough to Eat

Exhibition schedule: Penn State Abington Art Gallery, 116 Woodland Building, October 23 – December 15, 2017.

Peter Morgan’s exhibition (Almost) Good Enough to Eat, which opened at the new Penn State Abington Art Gallery, was astonishingly delicious. I would not recommend anyone to visit it in a state of being hungry. Beautifully glazed jelly doughnuts, melted cheese atop nacho chips, sweet waffles stacked on top of each other will make a spectator crave for food (almost) immediately. The variety of colors and forms, unusual compositions involving wildlife, and imaginary tastes that people can sense right away, make this exhibition especially interesting and almost childlike attractive. However, after spending more time in the gallery and analyzing these pieces, Morgan’s exhibition seems to demonstrate quite a challenging intellect which creates “connection between often seemingly disparate topics” (from Peter Morgan’s Artist’s Statement).

The gallery has total of six ceramic sculptures. Five of them are standing on the same height pedestals, and one central hotdog piece Voyage of the H.M.S. Frankfurter stands on the higher shelve. All six pieces are put apart from each other, whereas at the same time one makes a whole. The sculptures depict funny composed wildlife (except for the hotdog piece) with a food incorporated as a landscape.

For me, the nature of this exhibition reflects Morgan’s vision and understanding of the world which adds a touch to a whole picture. The first experience provided by this exhibition is some kind of superficiality and childishness. Perhaps, from the first glance, Morgan’s intentions were to create something that people have never seen before. But after careful observation, a spectator may consider that the author questions existential aspects in a deeper level. Unlike Jeff Koons, the author is evoking humor successfully. Through the use of puns and analogies, Morgan combines incompatible things both in context and scale.

“My objects are often archetypal depictions focusing on our idealized understandings and desires of the subject, rather than their actuality. I think of my sculptures being collaged from an encyclopedia, a place where, in theory, all the information in the world is kept in a concise, ideal, and easy-to-read format. My pieces illustrate and investigate what we know and how we know it, through an exploration and celebration of cultural mythologies. Through my selection of topics, I create a sense of place and time through which the viewer may enter the work, physically and/or psychologically.”  (www.artsmagazine.info)

In the work called The Hypothetical Prehistoric Giant Wolverine Battling a Polar Bear Over a Deal Beluga Whale, on top of a Glazed Huckleberry Jelly Doughnut, for instance, Morgan depicts Arctic wildlife standing on the beautiful colorful ceramic doughnut. Even though the name of the work directly describes what is going on, I feel that this piece could warn people about the global warming and other ecological interactions of the Arctic Ocean on a huge scale. Perhaps, it reminds of a human being on the top of the food chain or simply of celebration a carnivorous lifestyle and how culture drove human evolution in general.

To sum up, the exhibition (Almost) Good Enough to Eat by Peter Morgan, provides once-in-a-lifetime experience to see the dolphin jumping out of macaroni and cheese, cargo ship carrying a giant hotdog, and other easy-to-look-at-sculptures. In general, the exhibition implies the author’s intention to represent the illustration of cultural mythology. Morgan’s skilled craftsmanship, playfulness, and intricate intellectual clues create a beautiful absurd, which I truly enjoyed to observe.

WORK CITED

“(Almost) Good Enough to Eat”. Woodland Gallery. Penn State Abington College. 1600 Woodland Rd, Abington, PA 19001. 23 Oct. – 15 Dec. 2017.

Morgan, Peter. “Here Is My Show Here.” Peter Morgan, 2017, www.petergmorgan.com/here-is-my-show-here/.

Wampler, Angela. “‘Color Me Bad’ — Peter Morgan.” A! Magazine for the Arts, 29 Feb. 2012, www.artsmagazine.info/articles.php?view=detail&id=2012022621063035196.

Project: Essay 2

I believe the more you do something, the less frightening it becomes if you fail because you start to realize that the process is more important than the outcome.

-Anna Arsiriy

Being an older student, I lately came to the conclusion that there is an existential moment in my life when I must decide what I will be doing with my life. I used to tell my husband that “I am in my mid 20s and I still don’t know who I want to be when I grow up”. Even though I was joking, I constantly felt that I have to love what I do and do what I love. As simple as that.

Let me start from the very beginning. I was born and raised in Kazan, Russia. There were two turning points in my life’s path. First one was during my adolescence period. Since I was six, I’ve been professionally playing piano, so after elementary school my parents and music teachers decided that my future has no other option but to be connected with a pianist career. It’s ironic when you are a kid, the more you succeed in something, the more your parents “predefine” your future for you. Long story short, being in a very restricted environment with no choices left, I came to a breaking point and said “no” to music career.

I refused going to a Conservatory, and instead graduated high school with honors and became a student at Kazan National Research Technical University. In June 2011, I was qualified as a Bachelor of Engineering and Technology. I moved to the United States when I was 21 right after I graduated – this was a second major turning point. I came to the U.S. by myself with zero in my pocket, very poor English speaking skills, and no one there by my side.

Even though I successfully accomplished my degree in Russia, I always knew that Engineering does not line my bag of interests. Unfortunately, there are not so many schools in Russia that actually study Art as an independent major. Now, when I live and study in the U.S., the country of thousands of opportunities and tons of creativeness, I’ve been constantly pushing myself out of my comfort zone. This fall of 2017, I transferred to PSU from Bucks County Community College where I got my basic knowledge of 2D and 3D design fundamentals. Even though it is my second degree, I feel that I have never had so much passion to study as I do now!

After graduation from Penn State, I am planning to proceed my professional career as an artist in new Media, including Graphic and Web design, as well as relatively new field in Interactive Interior Design. I don’t like writing much about what my art is about, let alone giving directions/clues to a spectator because my art is open to any interpretations. My work (and my life in general) is not based on theory and moral, but rather on my own inner impulses which tell me where to go and why. Even though it may sound pretty generalized, I will keep working, creating, and achieving my goal as long as love and art are walking by my side.

On November 12, I visited the Museum of Modern Art in New York City which had a variety of fascinating exhibition of American contemporary artists. I concentrated my attention on the performance/installation called Reanimation 2010/2012/2013 by Joan Jonas, which was located in the Museum’s fourth-floor collection galleries. I intentionally called this exhibition as a performance or installation since it incorporated huge custom screens with four running videos, two wooden theater boxes with video, multiple ink and china marker drawings, two benches, and intricate crystal sculpture.

Jonas has often explored the possibilities of video and performance combination, thus her work largely occupies space. As a viewer, I had a sense of walking into this dark magical space experiencing some kind of a three-dimensional fantasy. “Its interwoven elements draw on the nonlinear qualities of Japanese Noh theater and on Icelandic white Halldor Laxness’s 1968 novel Under the Glacier, in which a young man is sent to investigate paranormal activity surrounding a glacier” (from the text on the wall). In fact, all videos of glaciers were captured by Jonas herself while she was investigating the glacial melt of Arctic Circle in Iceland. On the screens, images of severe snowy conditions, mountains, animals, and fish raises the message of the impact of human activities and invincible ecological processes on the Earth.

This multimedia installation was outstanding to me because as in many contemporary (after Post-modernism period) performances Jonas provided a sensory experience through videos, audios, drawings, and sculpture. To sum up, illustrating a glacial melt on one screen, listening to piano playing and capturing enigmatic sense of this performance, the essential message on the other screen shows that “Time is the one thing we can all agree to call supernatural”.

WORK CITED

“Reanimation 2010/2012/2013”. Collection Galleries, Floor 4. Museum of Modern Art. 11 W 53rd St, New York, NY 10019. 12 Nov. 2017.

Scott, Andrea K. “Joan Jonas’s Mythopoetic Vision.” The New Yorker, The New Yorker, 18 June 2017, www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/05/29/joan-jonas-mythopoetic-vision.

“Joan Jonas | Performance Drawing from Reanimation, Tate Live 2013, Tate Modern (2013) | Artsy.” Artsy – Discover, Research, and Collect the World’s Best Art Online, 2017, www.artsy.net/artwork/joan-jonas-performance-drawing-from-reanimation-tate-live-2013-tate-modern#!

Module 5

Postmodernism has been around for a long period of time. Starting in the 1960’s, it is one of the few theories that has been with artists for around a half century. People say Postmodernism is dead now, whereas I think that each theory/movement/style is a reaction to a previous one. In contemporary terms, Pomo evolved into an “updated version” instead of completely “dying”, just like any other previous movement. At the same time, we would definitely not define Pomo as a contemporary condition because of the immense changes happened in the last half-century!

The events which started happening at the dawn of the 20^th century caused a shift, or I would even say a crucial “update”. In his article The Death of Postmodernism And Beyond, Alan Kirby says that “…somewhere in the late 1990s or early 2000s, the emergence of new technologies re-structured, violently and forever, the nature of the author, the reader and the text, and the relationships between them” (philosophynow.org). Moreover, the rate of change has accelerated exponentially. Not only the invention of the Internet and new technologies, but also events such as 9/11, war of civilization, “dot-com bubble” in the U.S., globalization, etc. caused a possibility of a new (perhaps “officially unnamed yet”) state we live in.

I don’t believe we need Post-postmodernism. If Postmodernism is a rejection of Modernism, does it mean that Post-postmodernism is a return to Modernism (two negatives resolving to a positive)? Certainly, it is not the case which makes me think why should we call our times Post-postmodernism and associate it with Modernism in general? Perhaps, our descendants would create another “names” in not too distant future, and hopefully they would not call themselves as “post-post-…-postmodernists”.

I enjoyed reading the article of Daniel Green called Pre and Post Post-Modern: Art in a Globalized World, which states that “much art after postmodernism attempts to create an experience, and typically one not purely visual” (thinkingofnew.blogspot.com). I completely agree with this statement since I have noticed myself that the majority of art nowadays attempts to create an experience rather than simply “showing” a piece. The perception and evaluation of visual art has changed tremendously since emerging of the Internet. Even though direct visual experience is not comparable with digital, still everyone today has a chance to go online and “visit” any exhibition without leaving his/her room. Too many things became publicly available which caused a shift in aesthetic appreciation.

As an example, the exhibition called AllTURNatives: Form + Spirit 2017 I visited back in September (see Gallery #1 Photo Essay as of 09/21/17) featured a work of seven contemporary artists, who were able to create a fun experience for a viewer. Their work provided visual, audible, tactile, and other sensory experiences which encouraged visitors to explore the importance of direct interaction with a piece.  

Daniel Fishkin, the inventor of the Daxophone, was one of those seven featured artists.  His famous sound installation Tinnitus Suites investigates the aesthetics of hearing damage, which cannot be described just visually.

(dfiction.com)

This picture does not really explain anything to a viewer. Similar to Green’s conversation about Phillipsz’ Lowlands, Fishkin’s Tinnitus Suites “ is an experience which can be represented but not reproduced”.

(vimeo.com)

To sum up, postmodernism is an important theory in art. Whether post-postmodernism is needed or not, our time is the time of change. The culture and technology, as well as art in a modern world, have ever changing trends that cannot and must not be predicted. Pomo comes with the “death of meaning”, “death of art”, skepticism, irony, distrust of the grand narrative, and so on. As a result, “the death of the death of art” has washed over the past and created its own universe, perhaps officially unnamed as of today.

WORK CITED:

Kirby, Alan. “The Death of Postmodernism And Beyond.” Philosophy Now: a Magazine of Ideas, Alan Kirby, 2006, philosophynow.org/issues/58/The_Death_of_Postmodernism_And_Beyond.

Green, Daniel. “On The Contemporary.” Pre and Post Post-Modern: Art in a Globalized World, Daniel Green, 12 Sept. 2011, thinkingofnew.blogspot.com/2011/09/pre-and-post-post-modern-art-in.html.

Fishkin, Daniel. “Composing the Tinnitus Suites (2014).” D. Fiction, D. Fiction, 2017, dfiction.com/composing-the-tinnitus-suites-2014/.

Fishkin, Daniel, director. Composing the Tinnitus Suites: 2014 (Excerpts). 28 Mar. 2014, vimeo.com/90383414.

Module 4

Cindy Sherman, Untitled Film Still #21, 1978, Gelatin Silver Print

In creation of the Untitled Film Stills, Cindy Sherman is definitely sincere in regards to the fact that her work does not relate to theory. She claims that she does not think of theory when she creates something. She gets so concentrated and dedicated to the project she works on that she forgets about everything surrounding her, eliminates things that can distract her, such as paperwork and emails, and lets herself into the world of her personal expression and inspiration. I think that it is fine for the artist not to consider any theory while creating a piece. Certainly, in her Untitled Film Still #21 (1978) Sherman intends to express her concerns about the culture and mass media through the role of the small-town girl craving to get to know the Big City life. Perhaps, she intends to express some other ideas as well – we do not know that for sure. What we know is that sometimes Sherman herself is not aware of some interpretations that have existed out there and surrounded her work, so she (qtd. in Barrett) says,

There were times I would read something and I wouldn’t understand what the hell they were talking about or where they got that idea; there were times when I’d say, ‘Oh, yeah, that’s right, though I wasn’t thinking of it when I was doing it. I work without really pondering what I am doing (Barrett 187).

Untitled Film Stills are among the first artifacts to be called postmodern. But it’s pretty common when artist’s intentions do not go side by side with scholarly debates. Sherman is well aware that her Untitled Film Stills often relate to feminist theory. She says, “I don’t want to have to explain myself. The work is what it is and hopefully it’s seen as feminist work, or feminist-advised work, but I’m not going to go around espousing theoretical bullshit about feminist stuff” (Barrett 188). Her statements do not necessarily mean that she’s not well educated in art theory and that she simply lacks the knowledge of it. Sherman does not care what theory ‘they’ relate her work to because her work is driven by her inner impulse and inspiration rather than theoretical knowledge.

I believe that her Sex Pictures series probably reflect some aspect of theory. These pictures are not sexy (or even erotic). They do not feature Sherman herself in them even though she posed for the majority of her earlier work. They depict plastic dolls arranged in shocking and often violent compositions. These series make people think, and think deeply. I don’t feel that theory begins to lead Sherman’s work, but she is definitely aware of the fact that theory will be applied to it.

I believe that an artist does not have to be consciously guided by theory. Otherwise, art would become more like a science where every event/element/condition can be expressed through the formula or equation. There is no formula in art, and as a result such thing as “art for art’s sake” exists. In fact, there were many artists in art history who were not educated as a professional artist and did not have any idea about theory at all (for example, Henry Rousseau). Understanding theory, and especially intricate postmodern theories, is not what makes a person an artist.

WORK CITED:

Barrett, Terry. Why Is That Art?: Aesthetics and Criticism of Contemporary Art. Oxford University Press. 2012

Sherman, Cindy. “Untitled Film Still #21, 1978.” Moma.org, © 2017 Cindy Sherman, www.moma.org/collection/works/56618.

Exploring Gender and Identity

In today’s society, many people ask themselves whether they fit into the standards and norms that have been created. On one hand, the standards of sexuality, gender, and identity, make people question “Who am I?”, “Where do I belong?”, “Am I a true man or woman?”, “What is sexual for a man or woman?”, etc. On the other hand, the stereotypes created by todays’ society have a great impact that make people fearful of their self-expression. While a person’s gender may begin with the assignment of his/her sex based on his/her genital characteristics, the true identity of a person goes beyond biological aspect of gender. This virtual exhibition “Exploring Gender and Identity” features the artists who are not afraid of expressing the complex interrelationships between their identity, body language, and self-expression. Not only they touch the question of masculine vs feminine, male vs female, and gender binarity (cisgender vs transgender), but also explore the relationships with the standards of our society through their art.

Proposed List of Works (already narrowed down list):

Barbara Kruger – Gender is Irrelevant

Rion Sabean – Men Ups

Lyle Ashton Harris – Billie #1

Marina Abramovic; Ulay – Relation in Time

Lyle Reimer (@lylexox)– Unnamed

April Greiman – Does It Make Sense?

Kiki Smith – Tale

Andy Warhol –  Self-Portrait in Drag