Tuesday, 2 April 2013

Critical Studies Lecture Notes

DATE: 03.04.2013
Motivation to do research?
  • Interest?
  • Develop our own practise as artists?
  • Start close to home with own interests
  • How it is being used ?
  • Forms that it takes
Setting the scene
  • Colours used
  • Environment
  • Ask questions
  • Ripped which is suggestive of an animosity.
    (who did it? and why?  Remember that family politics are always dangerous waters to swim in.)
  • Reminds us that they are physical objects (impossible to do this with digital images.  Even with Photoshop such effects generally look fake) \
  • It shows how image/memory has been received/cared for.
  • An Argument: Photos are not preserved memories but rather destroy them.  If you have a photo taken at a party then later on all you remember is when the photo was taken.  On the other hand a photo can be used as an aide to memory as well since seeing the party in question can bring back memories about (in) significant events.
  • Description versus meaning (Textures of wallpaper or the style of the dress versus the reason for the photos)
  • Sharing photographic space through time (artists and grandmother – collages)
  • When grouping photos for presentations there should be consideration given to similarities between the tone, colour and mood of each image.
  • Photographs of memories (the human mind is malleable.  Studies done prove this to be true.  Talk to someone about the party they were at and eventually you'll be able to convince them that they were actually there. Note: this is a nasty trick which is easier to play on small children)
  • Keep in mind the reactions of people to your work.  This harkens back to the whole family politics.  But remember that you can't do anything without running the risk of offending someone.  Remember there are people in this world who want to ban Tom Sawyer because it depicts slavery. (oy vey I say)
People of note
  • Raphael Samuel – Theatres of memory
  • John Berger – Another way of telling – picture of a man and a horse. (There was some quote about to tell anything about the world outside the photograph which is a bit weird because it is in the nature of man to extrapolate data from information given)
  • Maureen Novak
  • Gillean Weaving
  • Biull Maines Collection
  • Butron Brothers
  1. How does the materiality of photographs shape how we experience them?
    (For example, how does it differ to carry an image in a wallet, put it in an album, see a photograph in a magazine, on your phone or a computer screen?)
    While a digital device can hold an infinite amount of images with little degredation (Jpegs and similar are lossy formats and will eventually pixilate) They can only be viewed while the device has a charge or is connected to something similar.  A traditional photograph, on the other hand. is subject to all manner of pressures, folds, tears (both emotional and physical :)) but is able to be viewed at any time.
  2. Can photographs ever be ‘truthful’?  Does a photographs detail or descriptiveness equate to truthfulness?
    I think that this really depends on the photographer and their intentions.  Making fake photographs is something of an artform (Lady Cottingtons fairies and the moon landing photos spring to mind - not because the moon landing is fake but rather because so much effort has been expanded to prove that the pictures themselves are fake [FYI: they're real, we went there, get over it])  Really it is up to the viewer to decide for themselves whether or not an image is truthful
  3. What factors can determine the meaning of a photograph?  Can any one person determine absolutely what a photograph means?  If so, who?  The photographers?  The viewer?
    Anytime you're searching for meaning in something it's always going to be personal to each individual who takes away whatever it is they are searching for.  If we leave aside the grammatical errors for a moment the answer to the question is "Maybe"

No comments:

Post a Comment