Dewey, John. (1980). New York: Perigee Books.
Chapter 4. Act of Expression (p. 60-84)
For Dewey, art is an act of expression, in which past experience that would otherwise be stale or inert obtain fresh meanings through media. Expression is "the clarification of turbid emotion" (p. 80). Unlike a discharge of emotion, it requires clarification, which makes art a purposeful action more than inspiration. Dewey put it:
The inspiration, however, is initial. In itself, at the outset, it is still inchoate. Inflamed inner material must find objective fuel upon which to feed. Through the interaction of the fuel with material already afire the refined and formed product comes into existence. The act of expression is not something which supervenes upon an inspiration already complete. It is the carrying forward to completion of an inspiration by means of the objective materials of perception and imagery ( 68-69)
Dewey implies that to express emotion, one needs a medium, a tool for expressing it and clarifying it. In addition, although Dewey did not articulate, there should be something that develop the faculty of expressing the emotion, not just discharging it.
Showing posts with label art. Show all posts
Showing posts with label art. Show all posts
Thursday, November 4, 2010
The Artistic-Aesthetic Curriculum
Greene, Maxine. (2007). In Randall Curren (Ed.), Philosophy of Education: an anthology. pp. 561-566. Blackwell Publishing.
Greene quotes John Dewey's approach to art as experience: art clarifies and concentrates the meanings of things ordinarily dumb and inchoate; works of art can keep alive "the power to experience the common world in its fullness"
In this light, Green argued: "This would not happen, I am sure, if it were not for the ability to pull aside the curtains of habit, automatism, banality, so that alternative possibilities can be perceived." (p. 562).
For Greene, art education contributes to developing the sense of agency when it takes participatory approaches or the "reader response" approach. She put it:
"How, on the various levels at which you teach, can you create the kinds of situations where involvement with the arts not only enables you and your students to combat boredom and banality, but develops among all of you the sense of agency that is most apparent (or so it seems to me) in encounters with the arts? This takes me back, of course, to the participatory approach or to the "reader response" approach. I have in mind the notion that works of art can never be realized by a merely passive attention. There has to be an active, energetic reading out." (p. 564)
Greene quotes John Dewey's approach to art as experience: art clarifies and concentrates the meanings of things ordinarily dumb and inchoate; works of art can keep alive "the power to experience the common world in its fullness"
In this light, Green argued: "This would not happen, I am sure, if it were not for the ability to pull aside the curtains of habit, automatism, banality, so that alternative possibilities can be perceived." (p. 562).
For Greene, art education contributes to developing the sense of agency when it takes participatory approaches or the "reader response" approach. She put it:
"How, on the various levels at which you teach, can you create the kinds of situations where involvement with the arts not only enables you and your students to combat boredom and banality, but develops among all of you the sense of agency that is most apparent (or so it seems to me) in encounters with the arts? This takes me back, of course, to the participatory approach or to the "reader response" approach. I have in mind the notion that works of art can never be realized by a merely passive attention. There has to be an active, energetic reading out." (p. 564)
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Women, Art and Ideology
: Questions for Feminist Art Historians. Pollock, Griselda. (1983). Woman's Art Journal, 4(1), 39-47.
In this article Pollock examines how feminism--she explains that it has steadily grown in art history since 1974--positions itself in relation to both mainstream art history and its radical critiques. She critiques Marxist cultural theory in its lack of insight into sexist exploitation and writes:
"Inasmuch as society is structured by inequal relations at the point of material production, so too is it deeply founded on inequal relations between the sexes. The nature of the societies in which art has been produced has not only been, for instance, feudal or capitalist, but in
historically varied ways, patriarchal and sexist. Neither form of exploitation, moreover, is reducible to the other." (p. 39)
In her refusal of the predominant art historian's myth about masculine creativity and feminine inferiority in art, she argues that feminism in art history is a political struggle contesting the dominant forms of social knowledge and the ideology of sexes.
With regard to the fact that even feminist art historians classify women artists as a gender representative, Pollock argues that such category not only has been pejorative but also dangerous because it may assume certain ideological supposed essence of womenless regardless of individual artists' situatedness.
She writes "art is a part of social production" (p. 43) in that it is productive and produces meanings, thus constitutive of ideology. Looking at films in particular, Pollock writes that in certain cases images of women in films are reflectors or representations of women's identities or social model, however, her emphasis is given to its signifying practice, i.e. actively producing meanings and reproducing certain ideological representations.
In this article Pollock examines how feminism--she explains that it has steadily grown in art history since 1974--positions itself in relation to both mainstream art history and its radical critiques. She critiques Marxist cultural theory in its lack of insight into sexist exploitation and writes:
"Inasmuch as society is structured by inequal relations at the point of material production, so too is it deeply founded on inequal relations between the sexes. The nature of the societies in which art has been produced has not only been, for instance, feudal or capitalist, but in
historically varied ways, patriarchal and sexist. Neither form of exploitation, moreover, is reducible to the other." (p. 39)
In her refusal of the predominant art historian's myth about masculine creativity and feminine inferiority in art, she argues that feminism in art history is a political struggle contesting the dominant forms of social knowledge and the ideology of sexes.
With regard to the fact that even feminist art historians classify women artists as a gender representative, Pollock argues that such category not only has been pejorative but also dangerous because it may assume certain ideological supposed essence of womenless regardless of individual artists' situatedness.
She writes "art is a part of social production" (p. 43) in that it is productive and produces meanings, thus constitutive of ideology. Looking at films in particular, Pollock writes that in certain cases images of women in films are reflectors or representations of women's identities or social model, however, her emphasis is given to its signifying practice, i.e. actively producing meanings and reproducing certain ideological representations.
Saturday, March 28, 2009
The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction
Benjamin, Walter. (15 July 1892—27 September 1940)
Written in 1936, first published in English in 1968 in Illuminations (pp. 217-252), New York: Schocken Books.
Retrieved on March 27, 2009 from http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/ge/benjamin.htm
Against Fascism, Benjamin finds a seed of politicization in art, in particular, film. While art appreciation was practiced personally as in a worship of cult, Benjamin states that masses appreciate art in forms of exhibition in the age of mechanical reproduction and articulates this change by saying "mechanical reproduction emancipates the work of art form its parasitical dependence on ritual...Instead of being based on ritual, it begins to be based on another practice--politics" (Part IV).
In parallel with mass appreciation in film as an art form, Benjamin gazes at the blurred distinction between author and public as seen newsreels and in particular, the cinema movement in Russia, where ordinary people were filmed and reality was established on the contrary to the Western capitalistic exploitation of the film.
In his argument that mechanical reproduction of art changes the reaction of the masses toward art, Benjamin stresses the power of film that turns the ordinary into the unconventional in the following:
"By close-ups of the things around us, by focusing on hidden details of familiar objects, by exploring common place milieus under the ingenious guidance of the camera, the film, on the one hand, extends our comprehension of the necessities which rule our lives; on the other hand, it manages to assure us of an immense and unexpected field of action. Our taverns and our metropolitan streets, our offices and furnished rooms, our railroad stations and our factories appeared to have us locked up hopelessly. Then came the film and burst this prison-world asunder by the dynamite of the tenth of a second, so that now, in the midst of its far-flung ruins and debris, we calmly and adventurously go traveling...The act of reaching for a lighter or a spoon is familiar routine, yet we hardly know what really goes on between hand and metal, not to mention how this fluctuates with our moods. Here the camera intervenes with the resources of its lowerings and liftings, its interruptions and isolations, it extensions and accelerations, its enlargements and reductions" (Part XIV).
In his response to distracted audience of film, Benjamin argues that films with their shock effects--constant moving images that requires reviewers' heightened sense--put the public in the position of the critic, however, the public is an absent-minded examiner at first. By this Benjamin means that the film has a high potential to mobilize the masses but the achievement of the mobilization is not automatic.
Written in 1936, first published in English in 1968 in Illuminations (pp. 217-252), New York: Schocken Books.
Retrieved on March 27, 2009 from http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/ge/benjamin.htm
Against Fascism, Benjamin finds a seed of politicization in art, in particular, film. While art appreciation was practiced personally as in a worship of cult, Benjamin states that masses appreciate art in forms of exhibition in the age of mechanical reproduction and articulates this change by saying "mechanical reproduction emancipates the work of art form its parasitical dependence on ritual...Instead of being based on ritual, it begins to be based on another practice--politics" (Part IV).
In parallel with mass appreciation in film as an art form, Benjamin gazes at the blurred distinction between author and public as seen newsreels and in particular, the cinema movement in Russia, where ordinary people were filmed and reality was established on the contrary to the Western capitalistic exploitation of the film.
In his argument that mechanical reproduction of art changes the reaction of the masses toward art, Benjamin stresses the power of film that turns the ordinary into the unconventional in the following:
"By close-ups of the things around us, by focusing on hidden details of familiar objects, by exploring common place milieus under the ingenious guidance of the camera, the film, on the one hand, extends our comprehension of the necessities which rule our lives; on the other hand, it manages to assure us of an immense and unexpected field of action. Our taverns and our metropolitan streets, our offices and furnished rooms, our railroad stations and our factories appeared to have us locked up hopelessly. Then came the film and burst this prison-world asunder by the dynamite of the tenth of a second, so that now, in the midst of its far-flung ruins and debris, we calmly and adventurously go traveling...The act of reaching for a lighter or a spoon is familiar routine, yet we hardly know what really goes on between hand and metal, not to mention how this fluctuates with our moods. Here the camera intervenes with the resources of its lowerings and liftings, its interruptions and isolations, it extensions and accelerations, its enlargements and reductions" (Part XIV).
In his response to distracted audience of film, Benjamin argues that films with their shock effects--constant moving images that requires reviewers' heightened sense--put the public in the position of the critic, however, the public is an absent-minded examiner at first. By this Benjamin means that the film has a high potential to mobilize the masses but the achievement of the mobilization is not automatic.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
