Quiz 3

 

POST #15

Chat GPT exercise 

"write a 4 line poem about: a rose is missing, after getting pregnant , I love puzzles, she leaves to cherish"

A rose is missing, petals worn,  

After life's bloom, a seed was born.  

I love puzzles, life's twists unfold,  

She leaves to cherish, brave and bold.   

“write a 4 line poem about: she dug deep, something unquestionably evil, we were like agents, a rose is missing”

She dug deep, a shadow revealed,

Something unquestionably evil, concealed.

We were like agents, seeking, dismissing,

Amidst the chaos, a rose is missing.

POST #14– LECTURE – DADA -SCULPTURE AND RELATED MOVEMENTS

QUIZ #2

1. Camera Obscura 

2. Albrecht

3.Virtruvian Man

4. Leonard Da Vinci

5. Renaissance Humanism 

6.Fresco

7.Petarch

8.Jan Van Eyck

9. One Point Perspective

10. Modernism

11.Wealthy Merchant

12. Avant-garde

13.Gitto

14. Fauvism 

15.Picasso

16. Cubism

17.Abstract Painting

18. Greenberg

19. Photographers

20. Nicephora Niepce

21.Etienne Jules

22.Muybridge Marey

23. Semiotics

POST #13 - READING GRQ AND DISCUSSION –MARGOT LOVEJOY– THE CAMERA AS ARTIFICIAL EYE AND THE INFLUENCE OF TOOLS, STOP MOTION VIDEO

GRQ:
1. Camera Obscura/ Camera Obscura
2. Light-Sensitive Chemistry
3.Silver Daguerrotype
4.Negative/Postive
5.Aura
6.Commodity Value
7.Exhibition Value
8.Cult Value/ Cult Value
9.Photomontage
10.Appropriated elements of Victorian
11.Film
12. Walter Benjamin
13.Edward Muybridge 
14Etienne-Jules Marey
15.Dadaists
16. John Heartfield
17. Hannah Hoch

POST #12 - LECTURE –PHOTOGRAPHY AND PRINTED MEDIA

The history of media specifically photography and printed media traces back to ancient times like cave paintings as one of the earliest forms of communication. 

These art forms grew into manuscript culture during the Middle Ages, where monks copied texts to share knowledge. For example, the Book of Kells is a famous manuscript from around 800 AD, blending Christian texts with detailed artwork.

 However, it was Johannes Gutenberg's invention of the printing press in 1450 that marked a revolutionary movement. It allowed for the mass production of books, primarily the Bible, which significantly boosted literacy and education, paving the way for the Renaissance and transforming society as a whole.

By the early 1800s, printed media was rapidly changing. Newspapers like The Times of London became popular due to the introduction of high-speed printing presses and the growth of railways, which helped distribute publications more widely. The invention of the offset press in 1853 made it even easier to produce large quantities of printed materials efficiently.

At the same time, photography was also evolving. The camera obscura had been used by artists and draftsmen since the 1500s to help them capture images of the real world in real-time. However, photographers found a way to permanently capture reality. In 1839, the daguerreotype was invented, which dramatically shortened exposure times from hours to just minutes, making it possible to photograph real-life subjects much more effectively and easily.

The wet plate collodion process, developed in 1851, made photography even more accessible and efficient, allowing portraits to be taken in just seconds. This groundbreaking leap in photography was exemplified by figures like Matthew Brady, who documented the Civil War, bringing the harsh realities of war to the public eye. 

 The advancements in printed media and photography have fundamentally transformed how we share information, paving the way for the complex media landscape we know today.

The early interactions between photography and motion capture highlight significant technological advancements that paved the way for modern cinematography. One pivotal moment occurred in 1878 when Eadweard Muybridge conducted a groundbreaking experiment that began with a $25,000 bet from his friend Leland Stanford, the railroad magnate. The contention was whether all four of a horse's hooves left the ground simultaneously during a gallop. To settle this, Muybridge set up multiple cameras along a race track. As the horse galloped by, the triggers attached to the cameras captured sequential images, providing undeniable evidence that Stanford was correct. This not only won Stanford his bet but also laid the groundwork for motion picture technology. 

Muybridge's experimentation led to the invention of the **zoopraxiscope**, a device that projected images from photographs printed on a rotating disc, creating the illusion of motion. His work on animal locomotion further advanced the understanding of movement, showcasing the camera's ability to capture reality.

Following Muybridge, **Louis Le Prince** emerged as a critical figure in early cinematography. In 1888, he created one of the first moving picture sequences with his **single-lens camera**. Despite his innovations, he mysteriously disappeared in 1890, which led to speculation about his fate and his contributions being overshadowed by others, like Thomas Edison and the Lumière brothers.

Edison’s assistant, William Dickson, played a vital role in the evolution of moving pictures. He developed the Kinetoscope in 1893, allowing individual viewing of films, and later worked on the Kinetophone, the first attempt to synchronize sound with moving images.

The Lumière brothers took a different approach in 1895 by creating the Cinématographe, a lightweight camera that could both capture and project film, leading to the first public screening of "Workers Leaving the Lumière Factory,” which is often regarded as the first motion picture.

Finally, the introduction of the Kodak #1 camera in 1888 by George Eastman made photography accessible to the general public, revolutionizing how people recorded their lives and experiences. Fast forward to 1975, when Steve Sasson at Kodak developed the first digital camera, marking another revolution that transformed photography into a mainstream activity shared widely in the age of social media.

This history emphasizes how important these moments are and how innovative individuals like Muybridge, Le Prince, Edison, and the Lumière brothers shaped the world of cinema and photography as we know it today. 

POST 11 ABSTRACT PAINTING –PHOTO/VIDEO BLOG POST -DEFINITION -REFLECTION

 

EDITED by OLGA OFITSEROVA

POST #10 - LECTURE - INDUSTRIAL- REVOLUTION

The Industrial Revolution, which began in the 1760s and lasted into the mid-19th century, was a time of major change that shifted society from farming and handmade goods to industries and machines. Starting in Britain and spreading worldwide, it transformed how people worked and lived. Inventions like the steam engine and power loom made production faster and cities grew as people moved to work in factories.  This period also changed media arts by introducing new technologies for sharing art and ideas. 

An important part of the Industrial Revolution was the invention of photography in the 1830s was groundbreaking. The daguerreotype process, one of the first photographic methods, allowed people to capture real-life scenes for the first time. Louis-Jacques-Mandé Daguerre invented the daguerreotype process in France. This profoundly changed how stories were told.  Paving a new way of photography and film in general. 

One key invention was lithography in 1796, a printing method that made it easy and cheap to reproduce images. This allowed for mass production of posters, ads, and art, making creative works more accessible and paving the way for modern media.

The printing press made written works, illustrations, and even serialized storytelling accessible to wider audiences. 

Finally, the era’s industrial materials like steel and glass inspired innovations in architecture and design, influencing everything from the shapes of cities to the visuals of modern art. The Industrial Revolution wasn’t just about machines; it sparked a creative revolution that reshaped the media arts forever.

In the 19th century, innovations like the collapsible metal paint tube, invented by John G. Rand in 1841, made it easier for artists to transport pre-mixed paints, making outdoor painting much more accessible and easier. This was during the same time of movements like Impressionism. Impressionism was a 19th-century art movement focused on capturing everyday scenes, light, and color with quick, loose brushstrokes.

 Artists painted outdoors, emphasizing the feeling of a scene over precise details. The Industrial Revolution influenced Impressionism by making travel easier with trains and inspiring artists to capture urban growth and modern landscapes. It reflected the fast-paced changes of the era while celebrating the beauty of ordinary moments.

At the same time, steam-powered printing revolutionized publishing, giving rise to affordable newspapers like "The Sun" in the 1830s and making novels, like Charles Dickens' "Oliver Twist", widely accessible. These advancements blended practicality and creativity, transforming how art and stories were created and shared once again. 

These advancements influenced how information was shared and creativity was expressed. For example, art and design moved toward mass-produced items like posters and advertisements. This era also inspired artists to reflect on industrialization’s impact with its challenges within their work. In a way, media arts as we know them wouldn’t exist without the technological leaps of the Industrial Revolution.

POST #9 - READING GRQ DISCUSSION–RENAISSANCE AND MODERN ART

GRQ:

1. Portraiture
2.Window
3.Perspective
4.Atmospheric Perspective
5.Masaccio
6.Linear
7.Eyck
8.Leonardo De Vinci
9. Raphael
10. The Birth Of Venus
11. The Stone Breaker
12.David
13.Artists
14.Avant-grade
15. Absolute

16. Kitsch

 

Midterm Presentation

   

POST #8 - LECTURE - RENAISSANCE -REALISM

As I think about the changes in art from the Renaissance to Realism, I find it fascinating to see how artists began to reflect the world around them differently. The Renaissance, which lasted from the 14th to the 16th century, celebrated ideals like beauty, divinity, and human perfection. Artists like Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo created stunning works filled with emotion and detail, often focusing on religious themes. Their paintings were about perfection, idealized human forms, and grand hero like narratives. 

The shift from Renaissance art to Realism represents an important change in the history of art, reflecting new ways of thinking about the world. During the Renaissance, artists concentrated on creating beautiful images of the human form, religious themes, and classical ideas, using techniques that made their work look balanced and lifelike. However, as time went on into the late 16th and 17th centuries, artists started to pay more attention to everyday life and real people, moving away from idealized subjects. I think it’s crucial to explore what caused this change, including new scientific discoveries, shifts in who funded art, and the growing interest in human experiences. By looking at the works of key artists from both periods, we can see how this transformation changed not just how art was made but also how people viewed the world around them. 

Within the mid-19th century, things started to change dramatically with the rise of the Realism movement. Realism was a response to Romanticism, which was known for its intense emotions and dramatic subjects. Realist artists wanted to depict life as it really was, focusing on everyday people and their experiences. I think this shift is crucial because it brought art down to earth, showing the dignity of ordinary life and making it accessible to everyone.

 For example, Jean-François Millet’s painting "The Gleaners" (1857) portrays three peasant women working in a field, highlighting their labor and struggles. Millet’s choice to focus on these common women emphasizes their hard work and the beauty of their everyday lives. Unlike the grand themes of the Renaissance, which often glorified heroes or divine figures, Millet’s focus shows that every life has value, which resonates deeply with me. The transition from Renaissance to Realism also reflects broader societal changes from the rich to the poor.. After the 1848 Revolution in France, there was a push for social change, and artists began to feel a responsibility to represent the world as it was, not just as it should be. As to why its called realism.

I think this movement is significant because it emphasizes a deeper understanding of humanity, showcasing the challenges and triumphs of real people. Artists were no longer just glorifying idealized subjects; they were presenting authentic life experiences, which made art more relatable. To highlight the differences further, let’s compare a Renaissance painting with a Realist one. Take Leonardo da Vinci’s "The Virgin of the Rocks". 

In this painting, the Virgin Mary is depicted beautifully and somewhat idealized, with an emphasis on grace and divinity. The background is often serene and ethereal, aligning with the spiritual themes of the time. 

In contrast, Realist artists aimed to strip away this idealization and present life without embellishments. They focused on ordinary scenes and the realities of everyday existence. So, what does Realism really mean? It’s about depicting ordinary life and the human condition with honesty. It emphasizes the importance of real people in real situations. I think this shift from Renaissance ideals to Realism is crucial because it demonstrates how art can evolve based on the society around it. 

In conclusion, the transition from Renaissance art to Realism marks a significant change in how artists approached their work and the messages they conveyed. I find it honestly inspiring that Realism honours everyday experiences and makes art more relatable. This shift not only challenged the traditions of the Renaissance, art and the way people viewed the world , but also paved the way for future movements that continue to explore the complexities of human life. It reminds us that art is not just about beauty and perfection; it can also be a powerful reflection of our shared experience with humanity and the world..

POST #7 READING, GRQ AND DISCUSSION– THEATER OF THE PEOPLE

In “Theater of the People” from Henry M. Sayre’s, I think Sayre really highlights the true power of theater as a tool for social change and cultural expression. He discusses how theater has been a platform for marginalized voices, allowing them to share their stories and challenge societal norms. This idea really resonates with me because I believe storytelling is such a crucial part of understanding different perspectives.

For example, Sayre mentions how theater was used in ancient Greece not just for entertainment but also as a way to engage the public in discussions about morality and politics. This is similar to modern-day movements, like those we see in street theater or community performances, where artists tackle issues like racial inequality, gender identity, and environmental justice. It’s amazing how these performances can bring awareness to critical issues and inspire audiences to think differently.

I also appreciate how Sayre points out that theater often reflects the values and struggles of its time. Today, we see this in works like "Hamilton", which reimagines American history and makes it relatable to contemporary audiences. It’s a reminder that theater can bridge gaps between past and present, making history feel alive and relevant.

Overall, I think the “Theater of the People” emphasizes that theater is more than just a form of entertainment; it’s a powerful medium for dialogue and change. It’s pretty cool and interesting to see how this tradition continues today, giving voice to diverse stories and almost fostering empathy and embrace change in our complex and frustrating world.

GRQ:

1. Greeks

2. Homer

3. Iliad, Trojan War

4. arete

5. Iliad 

6. Iliad, Odyssey

7. gods

8. induction

9. Pericles

10. Plato

11. Republic

12. Phaedrus

13. Dionysus

14. Satyr play

15. Old Comedy

16. Tragedies

17. human suffering, dead

18. Thespis, thespian

19. protagonist, antagonist 

20. Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripideses

21. Dionysus

22. Plato

23. catharsis 

24. Golden Mean

25. verisimilitude

26. three unities

27. decorum

28. Intermezzi

29. Opera

30. elite

31. masquerades

32. modernism

33. modern opera

34. Wagner

POST #6 LECTURE BAROQUE THEATRE - MODERN OPERA

When it comes to operas and musicals, I think it's really important to differentiate between the two, even though they share some similarities. Operas focus heavily on singing, often without much spoken dialogue, while musicals blend songs, dialogue, and dance to tell a story. Costumes are heavily important and create a performance that's engaging and unique. One of the many clear distinctions is that operas do not use microphones, so performers have to project their voices using extensive training. In contrast, musicals typically employ microphones to enhance the singers' voices, making it easier for audiences to hear every note.

Baroque theatre played a significant role in the evolution of both opera and musical theatre. Originating in the 17th century, it was characterized by elaborate sets, dramatic lighting, and heightened emotional expression. Baroque theatre emphasized spectacle and grandeur, which set the stage for the opulent productions we see in operas today. The use of music, drama, and visual art in Baroque theatre created a foundation for the development of operatic forms. Additionally, the storytelling techniques and themes explored during this period can still be felt in modern musicals, where the blend of visual artistry and narrative continues to thrive. The influence of Baroque theatre reminds us that both operas and musicals are deeply rooted in a rich history of theatrical innovation, highlighting how these genres have evolved while maintaining their connection to past artistic movements.

In addition, the difference lies in the style of music, I think. Opera usually features classical compositions, whereas musicals can encompass a variety of genres, from pop to rock. For example, Broadway hits like Hamilton and Wicked showcase a range of contemporary musical styles, making them accessible to a broader audience. Whereas, Phantom of the Opera presents a "unique story" some might say.. While its fancy production and sweeping score might give it an operatic feel, it incorporates spoken dialogue and a more modern musical style, suggesting that it fits better in the musical category, I think. This blend of elements has led some to argue that it is not a pure opera. In my opinion, it’s important to differentiate between these two forms of art. 

Many people consider "The Phantom of the Opera" to be one of the greatest operas ever created. However, others argue that it leans more toward being a musical. The music in "Phantom" is definitely more theatrical and accessible than traditional opera. While the emotional weight of the story is there, the structure of the piece and the way it's presented make me lean toward calling it a musical.

 On the pro side, "Phantom" has unforgettable melodies and a gripping narrative that draws you in, making it popular with a wide audience. It features beautiful arias and duets that are reminiscent of operatic styles, which is why some people claim it deserves the title of opera. I think its super interesting how they used the masks too. However, the integration of dialogue and the focus on staging are hallmarks of musicals rather than operas. Other popular musicals like "Hamilton" and "Les Misérables" "Lion King" to "Wicked" also showcase this blend of storytelling and music, using a mix of genres that keeps them fresh and engaging.

So, is "Phantom" the greatest opera ever created? I’d say no. While it has operatic elements, it’s ultimately a modern musical that borrows from opera. The way it combines classical and contemporary influences is impressive, but it doesn't fit neatly into the opera category. Recognizing the distinctions between these art forms helps us appreciate each for what they truly are. Operas fully embrace the “operatic form” with their dramatic vocal performances and orchestration. It’s fascinating to see how these art forms have evolved together, influencing each other over the years, while still maintaining their unique identities separating them. 

While I may not be heavily into operas or musicals myself, I can recognize the hard work and dedication that go into crafting these narratives and stories within operas and musicals. The creativity and talent involved are truly incredible and deserve appreciation, regardless of the classification. Each form offers a unique way to engage with art and storytelling, making them both significant in their own way.

POST #5 - READING - GRQ - DISCUSSION - THE ART OF INDIGENOUS AMERICANS ART HISTORY: A CENTURY OF EXHIBITIONS

NATIVE AMERICAN ART

America has a complicated history of using the achievements of others, especially when it comes to Indigenous art. Often, this art has been used to distract from current issues while promoting a view of “American achievement and culture.” For instance, during times of war, like World War II, interest in Native art increased as it was highlighted to shift attention away from the chaos in Europe and counter negative feelings about wartime countries. Artists like Marsden Hartley and John Sloan became popular during this period, reinforcing the idea that America was built on Native American soil, its own culture rich with history. 

Indigenous art also gained recognition during various feminist movements, showing the connection between cultural identity and social justice. While it’s important to celebrate Indigenous art, this appreciation should happen all the time—not just during moments of conflict. Engaging with Native art allows us to recognize the stories and perspectives it holds. This art isn’t just a tool for distraction; it’s a vibrant expression of culture, history, and resilience as well. Slowly but surely, it is coming back with recognition and is much deserved. By consistently embracing Indigenous art, we acknowledge its vital role in America’s history and culture, promoting a deeper understanding of the diverse influences that shape our society. Ultimately, the value of Indigenous art goes beyond its beauty; it reminds us of America’s rich cultural diversity and the need to continuously support Indigenous voices and their contributions.

The article explores a deepened and wide exploration of the relationships between Indigenous art and American art history, highlighting different key exhibitions in the past century from the 1920s to the 2000s. Native American art is often marginalized and separated from the rest in U.S. museums compared to other arts. This could seem quite offensive to some making it seem like they arent apart of American history almost but some might think its separated due to the impact they have made and how they have truly defined art.

The article divides Indigenous art history into three periods, exploring how Native art was celebrated for its "American" identity post World War 1 and then it regained attention during the Civil Rights era. The article states for greater recognition of Native art in mainstream American art with a focus on contemporary Native artists.

Initially, in the early 20th century, Native art was celebrated as a symbol of American originality, with significant exhibitions like the 1931 Exposition of Indian Tribal Arts. Interest spiralled in the 1950s but later revived in the 1970s with movements like Civil Rights and "Red Power," leading to prominent shows such as "Two American Painters" and "American Indian Art: Form and Tradition." 

Despite this, Native art has often been segregated in museums, with institutions like the Denver Art Museum making notable efforts to integrate contemporary works. Overall, while Native American art has gained recognition, however, it sadly still remains inconsistent.

 GRQ: 

1. Native
2. Institutions
3. Indigenous art
4. Indigenous cultures
5. Authenticity
6. Pueblo Woman
7. Museum of Modern Art
8. Multiculturalism
9. Artists like Fritz Scholder and Linda Lomahaftewa
10. Sculpture and the Native American
11.Native American art
12. Marginalization  
13. New generation of scholars

ROMAN ENTERTAINMENT - GOTHIC THEATRE

DISCUSSION: 

Repeated exposure to violent entertainment, whether through ancient Rome or to playing video games in the present, to watching UFC on the weekends. This outcome potentially has a risk and could numb individuals to the consequences of real-life aggression and let them think it's okay to act on them. Violence has become a form of entertainment that may lead to society viewing it as acceptable or even admirable, eroding ethical boundaries, and cultural boundaries. Why do we as humans resort to violence in general? Are we that bored? What causes this infliction of pain on others.

 

 

By embedding violence since Earth was born basically, societies create a self-perpetuating cycle where future generations continue to see violence as a normative part of life or entertainment. Its almost our instinct you could say. In the modern context, there is concern that children exposed to violent video games might develop a distorted understanding of conflict resolution, empathy, and social interaction, examples of negative outcomes would be school shootings. 

  

Combating violence related to media and addressing the rise in school shootings requires an approach that includes education, regulation, mental health support, and community involvement. This is one way we can teach people and for our future generations that violence is not the answer, whether it's for plain entertainment or a response. I think banning anything regarding violence like tightening gun laws everywhere, also by addressing these issues from multiple angles, it is possible to reduce the impact of violence and promote safer environments for individuals and communities. We cannot escape media. Media is everywhere. modern concerns revolve around the psychological impact of virtual violence rather than acting upon it. Not saying it’s better now, but we clearly have abided through this in the past and its getting better and I think there's potential to get even better.