I'm so extremely bored with everything-- but I've been painting! And I've finally come to the side of The Doors and A Clockwork Orange, as well as an onslaught of 70s punk bands (New York Dolls, MC5, The Clash, The Stooges). I love them. Can't get enough of them. Such great music always inspires me to paint. Although I was drunk, I'm very happy with what I did on my newest painting Monday night/Tuesday morning...I successfully broke past that "oh, I don't know what I'm doing... what I expected, how to work with it"-phase and just let the painting "be." I always get good results when I just do the work without trying to "correct" things. I think listening to the music and being under the bottle caused me to think less of keeping with a stylistic theme and focusing more on my original concept, the idea of personal space merging into the space of another, the blending of forms/bodies... and the infinitesimal void left in between; and, stylistically, how color can create that void. I found myself extremely interested in color and emptiness, so it's nice to focus on that instead of whether or not the painting is "pretty." It still is, but not in the typical way my paintings have been aesthetically pleasing.
I spent the last two days doing absolutely nothing, or at least half-going to class/doing work. Today I ditched all of the classes (mainly because they are all exceptionally boring) and hung out at home because I am still recovering from a stella-induced hang over from Monday night drinking and a cold. Now that they're all gone and my classes are through for the week, I'm treating myself to movie watching and music listening.
I will (hopefully) be buying my ticket to Dublin tomorrow, which is sooo exciting-- three weeks of K, booze, italian "fat chips" and seeing the Irish city and countryside. Apparently we'll be heading over to Galway to see one of his friends and his wife (who happens to be American). Should be fun. I'm dying to be reunited with my dollface, life seems so halved without him.
I'm working in the gallery and there an, I'm guessing, art history class in here. I don't think I should be here anymore, honestly, my opinion is becoming to extremely critical of everything art criticism-related. I can't take it... it's all to contrite and pompous-- know i know why so many artists can't stand art historians.
I talked to one of professors about her writing me a letter of rec. and by god was it the most vigor-sapping experience. I can understand her suggestions, but I don't understand the need to 1) email programs/faculty if i have nothing to ask about... and i'm doing a taught masters, where research is limited 2) what's wrong with going to the uk instead of the us for grad school? It costs way more here!
I was completely disillusioned after talking to her. K keeps telling me to do a MFA in Painting or something instead of a MA in Art History/Market. I just don't see why I'd do a studio degree when I really want to focus on doing the artwork myself without feeling obligated to do it. Slade's at UCL has an interesting MFA program though, that focuses on forging critical theory along with one's work-- something I think would be useful to me.
I might look over Central St. Martin's again... and Slade as well. Never hurts to try right? Especially if I can get a portfolio together.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Thursday, October 15, 2009
New, "aware," art historians - rant
I'm sitting in the art gallery and being forced to listen to a bunch of very, very...erm, "smart" modern art students discuss jazz music and a film that deals with it. It's slightly infuriating the way they're dealing with Jazz, it's content, and their misconceptions of it's history and connotations.
First inaccuracy: I think it's fairly accepted that blues and jazz, although very close and they did borrow from one another, they did not emerge from one another. Essentially they were forming at the same time. It's pretty accurate to say that jazz evolved from ragtime in the 19th century, at the same time an early stage of blues was developing.
Second inaccuracy/slightly racially charged assertion: Apparently one song that arose in the film they viewed was, from what I gather, "Jelly Roll Blues." The only thing this wonderful group of scholars could gather was that the song had sexual connotations because of the name.. although evidently, unless it was provided by them, none of them were aware of the fact that the song was composed by one Jelly Roll Morton. The song is completely instrumental, so it's hard to understand how it became something similar to "Milkshake" by Kelis, that apparently "white people wouldn't have understood" as sexually charged. One person states that he learned in his jazz survey that "jelly roll" was a euphemism for the male genitalia, which it may well have been in some cases, but I can't see how one can make that distinction for three reasons: 1) the song was named after Morton, as many early blues and jazz songs were, ex. "Memphis Slim U.S.A" by Memphis Slim 2) The song is instrumental 3) I can't see why Morton would take on a name that essentially means, according to them, "Penis" Morton.
The way I've always understood the phrase "jelly roll" in blues and jazz is in reference to movement, a song that can make your "jelly roll" from dancing.
I think this kind of annoyed me mainly because it made a direct correlation to rap music and modern African American music that is usually sexually charged. Although they are subgenres of jazz and blues, it's important to make the distinction that they subject matter is not always connected. Moreover, there was a tone of devaluation in the way they spoke of the song and jazz in general, simply because of the content. The fact that "white people wouldn't understand" is saying quite a bit, as if to say if they had the music wouldn't at all be important.
This is the second thing today that's really made me wonder about people's analytical skills. The first had to do with a very long, drawn out and repetitive discussion about subjectivity and the art of Valie Export, particularly "Tap and Touch Cinema." Most people were saying that her piece objectifies her as a woman although objectification really does imply making someone or something into an object and lording over it. It's about ownership, when a woman is objectified it implies that she can be owned, used, and discarded. In no way does Valie Export's piece give anyone the power to objectify her. In my view, the piece actually forces the participants to face the reality of her existence, acknowledge her as an individual. The fact that her breasts are not visible but can be touched removes their importance from her identity: yes, she is a woman, yes she has breasts, do they define her beyond this physiological sense? No. I think that's the resounding message in the piece. Body parts are not the whole of a person. They are indeed just parts. Society puts too much emphasis on them and that is why the men who participated were "scarred," because they felt they were violating "her." What Valie Export is saying, however, is that you can't objectify an object. It's the reverse of artists only showing breasts, ass, or a vagina to represent women. "Tap and Touch Cinema" is saying "Go ahead, touch them. I don't care because I am an individual, those do not define although you've been programmed to think they do."
I think all of this is coming out of pure frustration with classes and the way people are approaching discussions about art and music. Basically I feel like I've spent 6 hours of listening to verbal diarrhea. Everyone is so obnoxious. Everyone is so pretentious. I don't understand how some of these self-proclaimed "feminists" are thinking critically about art and feminist art, while at the same time taking a very commercialized and mainstream view of what feminism is: "oh, she's allowing them to see/touch her so she's just perpetuating the stereotype." I thought the general basis of feminism was to reject gender roles put in place by men? Didn't men decide that women shouldn't expose themselves publicly, or that their "parts" were sacred? In other words,
Oh bah... I'm tired of thinking about this. It's likely my thoughts are jumbled anyway and none of this makes sense... but oh well.
First inaccuracy: I think it's fairly accepted that blues and jazz, although very close and they did borrow from one another, they did not emerge from one another. Essentially they were forming at the same time. It's pretty accurate to say that jazz evolved from ragtime in the 19th century, at the same time an early stage of blues was developing.
Second inaccuracy/slightly racially charged assertion: Apparently one song that arose in the film they viewed was, from what I gather, "Jelly Roll Blues." The only thing this wonderful group of scholars could gather was that the song had sexual connotations because of the name.. although evidently, unless it was provided by them, none of them were aware of the fact that the song was composed by one Jelly Roll Morton. The song is completely instrumental, so it's hard to understand how it became something similar to "Milkshake" by Kelis, that apparently "white people wouldn't have understood" as sexually charged. One person states that he learned in his jazz survey that "jelly roll" was a euphemism for the male genitalia, which it may well have been in some cases, but I can't see how one can make that distinction for three reasons: 1) the song was named after Morton, as many early blues and jazz songs were, ex. "Memphis Slim U.S.A" by Memphis Slim 2) The song is instrumental 3) I can't see why Morton would take on a name that essentially means, according to them, "Penis" Morton.
The way I've always understood the phrase "jelly roll" in blues and jazz is in reference to movement, a song that can make your "jelly roll" from dancing.
I think this kind of annoyed me mainly because it made a direct correlation to rap music and modern African American music that is usually sexually charged. Although they are subgenres of jazz and blues, it's important to make the distinction that they subject matter is not always connected. Moreover, there was a tone of devaluation in the way they spoke of the song and jazz in general, simply because of the content. The fact that "white people wouldn't understand" is saying quite a bit, as if to say if they had the music wouldn't at all be important.
This is the second thing today that's really made me wonder about people's analytical skills. The first had to do with a very long, drawn out and repetitive discussion about subjectivity and the art of Valie Export, particularly "Tap and Touch Cinema." Most people were saying that her piece objectifies her as a woman although objectification really does imply making someone or something into an object and lording over it. It's about ownership, when a woman is objectified it implies that she can be owned, used, and discarded. In no way does Valie Export's piece give anyone the power to objectify her. In my view, the piece actually forces the participants to face the reality of her existence, acknowledge her as an individual. The fact that her breasts are not visible but can be touched removes their importance from her identity: yes, she is a woman, yes she has breasts, do they define her beyond this physiological sense? No. I think that's the resounding message in the piece. Body parts are not the whole of a person. They are indeed just parts. Society puts too much emphasis on them and that is why the men who participated were "scarred," because they felt they were violating "her." What Valie Export is saying, however, is that you can't objectify an object. It's the reverse of artists only showing breasts, ass, or a vagina to represent women. "Tap and Touch Cinema" is saying "Go ahead, touch them. I don't care because I am an individual, those do not define although you've been programmed to think they do."
I think all of this is coming out of pure frustration with classes and the way people are approaching discussions about art and music. Basically I feel like I've spent 6 hours of listening to verbal diarrhea. Everyone is so obnoxious. Everyone is so pretentious. I don't understand how some of these self-proclaimed "feminists" are thinking critically about art and feminist art, while at the same time taking a very commercialized and mainstream view of what feminism is: "oh, she's allowing them to see/touch her so she's just perpetuating the stereotype." I thought the general basis of feminism was to reject gender roles put in place by men? Didn't men decide that women shouldn't expose themselves publicly, or that their "parts" were sacred? In other words,
Oh bah... I'm tired of thinking about this. It's likely my thoughts are jumbled anyway and none of this makes sense... but oh well.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
I have decided (ish) on what my last semester in hell Denton will be like class wise. Here it is:
Grad. Contemporary French Theory (SOOO excited about this one)
Topics in Roman Art History
Creative Writing: Poetry
Political science (bummer)
I contemplated taking it easy next semester with all boring classes.. but since I'm going to graduate school I decided I might as well take at least one or two classes in my area of study. Unfortunately there are no graduate level art history classes that tickle my fancy, but at least I get to take a French one, which sounds like loads of fun (and work).
Depending on whether I get the full 12 hours of credit from studying abroad last semester or just 6, I might drop one or two of these (like the Art history and creative writing ones) and take it easy anyway. :)
Grad. Contemporary French Theory (SOOO excited about this one)
Topics in Roman Art History
Creative Writing: Poetry
Political science (bummer)
I contemplated taking it easy next semester with all boring classes.. but since I'm going to graduate school I decided I might as well take at least one or two classes in my area of study. Unfortunately there are no graduate level art history classes that tickle my fancy, but at least I get to take a French one, which sounds like loads of fun (and work).
Depending on whether I get the full 12 hours of credit from studying abroad last semester or just 6, I might drop one or two of these (like the Art history and creative writing ones) and take it easy anyway. :)
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
K left this morning and I am in sadness... it's so depressing having him here for two weeks and then having him leave, just to do the horrible two and half month wait again before we're back together.
The most annoying part of all of this is that he didn't actually fly out of Texas until about an hour ago, but because this shitstain of a place has a horrible public transportation system he had to leave extremely early to catch the bus to the airport. As a result, I'm extremely tired and frustrated... I hate this town more than before now, mainly because K took it upon himself to emphasize all the problems with it and then leave me to wallow in them...
Not fair. at. all.
Now I'm back to the intense monotony of school and work, graduate school applications. K is considering moving to Thailand or Morocco or South America or some other cheap place in the world that would allow him to write and live comfortably with the money he has, a fabulous idea aside from the fact that I want Europe, Europe, Europe! If only he hadn't already done his London adventure... or traveled all over the world... maybe he could do one in Scotland? One can write anywhere, right? I don't know, there's something marvelous and scary about the future being so ambiguous.
Saturday, September 19, 2009
Quelqu'un m'apporte le déjeuner au travail
So, K has been here for a week so far and it's been fabulous. It's nice to have someone to go walking with, to have lunch with, to cook dinner with, to talk with-- so nice. So, it's been a week of total bliss where I've been able to get all my homework done a head of time and spend quality time with my main squeeze.
Luckily it wasn't bad when my parents met him, it was actually quite pleasant-- they even want to try to spend more time with him before he leaves. My dad, although he had his moments of being a pain and slightly rude, was on better behavior than usual, so I can't complain... not much anyway.
----
I've noticed something rather bizarre lately. Whenever my mother brings up me and K's relationship it almost instantly goes to her relationship with my dad, giving up dreams for love... and other stuff that does not apply to us. It's bizarre and I often find myself getting confused and offended before I realize she's talking more about herself than any concern she has for me.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
je brûle d'impatience de le voir!
It's K day! He arrived in about four hours and I'm so overly excited. It's funny, I'm relatively calm and then, in the middle of doing something and upon thinking of him actually being here, I have a burst of squealing and smiling uncontrollably.
My parents are about an hour from me at the moment; we all decided it would be easier if they just came up for the day to meet him; primarily because 1) I have no car to drive the five hours to their place 2) it's five hours away 3) i work the weekends and they live five hours away!
So, now they're on their way, bringing me a love seat they don't use, some of my books, and other things. My mom is stoked to meet K and I think my dad has-- er, hopefully -- abandoned his strategy of "interrogate, intimidate, interrogate!" He might actually attempt to be the nice human being he's capable of being, after all he did offer to pick K up from the airport. It's a good thing too because it's raining cats and dogs here, I couldn't imagine K, who has been struck with ailment after ailment recently, would be interested in exploring the city or my small university town on such a soggy day.
Anyway, I'm off to have another burst of glee and impatience!
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Work, school, applications/forms!
This week was the official first week of my last year in undergrad and boy was it busy! Going to work at the gallery, filling out forms for the honor's college, printing and reading articles for class, and looking up graduate schools abroad-- all of that plus fitting a nicotine deprived K into my busy, busy schedule. I have managed, and managed well.
I'm still missing some things though.
For instance, I still need to have my professor's signature so I can begin working on this independent research paper (so I can have honors credit for class), drop off another form to the Honor's college to have my Senior seminar count as an Honor's capstone course -DONE-, start on my Statement of Purpose for college, email the apartment complex K's info since he'll be my guest for two weeks, and the list goes on.....
------
At the moment I'm sitting in the gallery reading Santeria Enthroned and hoping I'll get an email later saying I'm off work tomorrow-- which would mean a three days of freedom for me (no school on Monday because of labor day), which ultimately translates to more leisure and work time. Well, it mostly means that I just won't have to sit in this cold gallery for six hours.
Last night I made up a wonderful schedule to insure that I'm one class meeting ahead in all my courses, something that will make it easier for me to juggle everything as well as entertain K while his here instead of being bogged down with work. Actually, even this week, without being a head on readings and everything, I found it rather easy to make sure all the work I was expected to do was done-- it was not as stressful as I thought it would be. Next week, though, I'll be much more relaxed as I've already finished readings for two classes for the next two weeks, will finish papers for them as well, and have successfully established which graduate schools I'll apply to (starting the generic SOP for them tonight). I'm very proud of myself; I think K's meticulous nature has rubbed off on me!
So, these are the graduate programs I'm applying to, slightly in order of which I prefer (and I do mean slightly). I think this list is pretty set in stone, although whether I apply to Paris I/IV is dependent on whether or not I get the C1 level on the TCP/DALF:
-University of Edinburgh, School of Arts, Culture, and Environment "MSc Modern Art: History, Curating, Criticism"
-City University London's MA in Culture, Policy, Management (in Art)
-IESA's MA in the Art Market
-Paris I's M1 in Art Market/Business
On the fence with:
Birkbeck University
As you can see, my Paris choice has dropped below the others which allow me a new, international experience. Edinburgh sounds like a dream, I've never been there but everything about the program and about the city (that I've been told) is appealing-- medieval style architecture, beautiful landscape, program that focuses on modern art history as well as vocational experience... it's all so much of what I want. Plus, the fact that I've not been there and, therefore, will have a new experience abroad is extremely exciting. I'd love to go to this university. CUL and IESA are appealing as well because I'd spend the bulk of my studies, if not all of them, in London (ironic, since after I visited for a day I was insanely bored of it) and I'd have opportunities for internships. With Paris, the benefits are that it's insanely cheap, is entirely in Paris, and requires an internship. The benefit of all of these in comparison to NYU's Gallatin program (which was going to be the only US program I applied to)? Well, they're shorter and are $60, 000 + less, plus they put in the same city or close to K, although I'm sure he wouldn't mind finally conquering North American, one of the few places he hasn't lived in yet.
Anyway, according to him and what will seemingly be my 1st class honors degree when I graduate (as says University College London's page on degree equivalents), I'll "get all of them." I'm thinking so too, especially adding my research/conference experience, language proficency (-ish), and job experience (uni gallery work counts too, right?), I should have all of them in the bag. Plus, or so I've heard, UK unis taking American money-- and I'd be more than willing to give it, especially to Edinburgh.
------
At the moment I'm sitting in the gallery reading Santeria Enthroned and hoping I'll get an email later saying I'm off work tomorrow-- which would mean a three days of freedom for me (no school on Monday because of labor day), which ultimately translates to more leisure and work time. Well, it mostly means that I just won't have to sit in this cold gallery for six hours.
Last night I made up a wonderful schedule to insure that I'm one class meeting ahead in all my courses, something that will make it easier for me to juggle everything as well as entertain K while his here instead of being bogged down with work. Actually, even this week, without being a head on readings and everything, I found it rather easy to make sure all the work I was expected to do was done-- it was not as stressful as I thought it would be. Next week, though, I'll be much more relaxed as I've already finished readings for two classes for the next two weeks, will finish papers for them as well, and have successfully established which graduate schools I'll apply to (starting the generic SOP for them tonight). I'm very proud of myself; I think K's meticulous nature has rubbed off on me!
So, these are the graduate programs I'm applying to, slightly in order of which I prefer (and I do mean slightly). I think this list is pretty set in stone, although whether I apply to Paris I/IV is dependent on whether or not I get the C1 level on the TCP/DALF:
-University of Edinburgh, School of Arts, Culture, and Environment "MSc Modern Art: History, Curating, Criticism"
-City University London's MA in Culture, Policy, Management (in Art)
-IESA's MA in the Art Market
-Paris I's M1 in Art Market/Business
On the fence with:
Birkbeck University
As you can see, my Paris choice has dropped below the others which allow me a new, international experience. Edinburgh sounds like a dream, I've never been there but everything about the program and about the city (that I've been told) is appealing-- medieval style architecture, beautiful landscape, program that focuses on modern art history as well as vocational experience... it's all so much of what I want. Plus, the fact that I've not been there and, therefore, will have a new experience abroad is extremely exciting. I'd love to go to this university. CUL and IESA are appealing as well because I'd spend the bulk of my studies, if not all of them, in London (ironic, since after I visited for a day I was insanely bored of it) and I'd have opportunities for internships. With Paris, the benefits are that it's insanely cheap, is entirely in Paris, and requires an internship. The benefit of all of these in comparison to NYU's Gallatin program (which was going to be the only US program I applied to)? Well, they're shorter and are $60, 000 + less, plus they put in the same city or close to K, although I'm sure he wouldn't mind finally conquering North American, one of the few places he hasn't lived in yet.
Anyway, according to him and what will seemingly be my 1st class honors degree when I graduate (as says University College London's page on degree equivalents), I'll "get all of them." I'm thinking so too, especially adding my research/conference experience, language proficency (-ish), and job experience (uni gallery work counts too, right?), I should have all of them in the bag. Plus, or so I've heard, UK unis taking American money-- and I'd be more than willing to give it, especially to Edinburgh.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)