elizabeth.valentin

Going to go see the work of Otto Piene and Hans Haake at the MIT List Visual Arts Center has been quite an interesting experience because the work, and the discussion that it evokes are something I am not familiar with.  The idea of Artscience promotes that understanding the world through art is not where the line should stop, and understanding the world through science does not provide a complete understanding of the world.  The both have to work simultaneously because they are not separate from each other.

I am very interested in this notion of categorizing because I view it as a problematic way to have ANY understanding of the world.  The ideals of Artscience challenge us to break down preconceived notions of art separate from science, and instead come to understand it as a new notion completely and as a valid application of both.

With Piene’s “Lightballet,” we are placed in a position as viewers to not necessarily consider the objects that are emitting light, but the actual experience of the projected light as an installation.  What happens here is a conversation between your body and your consciousness and the experience that is occurring within the space, as the light dances across and through the room, and often onto you.  The actual objects and sculptures projecting the light become secondary.  Mark Linga, the gallery educator at the List Visual Art Center, described the light boxes as “the skin” and “the vehicle” for a means of a transcendental experience.

Hans Haake’s work, which was actually a recreation of a show he had in 1967, allows us to actually observe objects and asses them as sculpture, but secondarily as well.  Its not so much the physicality of his work that is in question, but the actual phenomena and system that allows for his pieces to exist that Haake would like his challenge his viewer to contemplate.  His pieces rely on self-regulation, and his attempt to isolate specific systems are interesting because, as Linga stated, it’s impossible to completely isolate one system because everything is contingent upon everything else.  These concepts that Haake is presenting through his work are a prime example of artscience-the melding of the two concepts is necessary in order to understand, react, challenge, and question the world we live in where everything is dependent on everything else and where a push and pull are always at play.

I do plan to delve into the topic of Artscience more, and examine the issues in categorizing works of art in order to better understand them.  I will add my research to the bog posting, once it is complete.

Working with Ryan Davis at the Boys and Girls Club in Dorchester has definitely put me in a position I have never considered when it comes to becoming an educator.  For a few years now I have been very sure about the age range of students I want to teach, that being high school aged students.  Working with and interacting with the kids at the Boys and Girl’s Club has definitely allowed me to consider a draw towards working with a much younger age group.

As cliche is this may sound, working with younger kids, especially in a program outside of a school setting, is surprisingly inspiring.  The reason why I have always been set on working with high school age students is because at this age, students are conscious of all of the obstacles working against them in their lives,  especially students coming from an urban setting.  This challenge strikes a cord with me because it’s something I had to face as a high school student, and it’s a part of the adversity I had to overcome in order to be where I am today.  And while I am still very concerned with this position, being at the Boys and Girls Club and working with the same 6-9 year olds every week opened my eyes to the fearlessness we posses when we truly believe that ANYTHING is possible.

The Boys and Girl’s Club is first and foremost a safe environment for students to be during after school hours especially in an environment like the urban communities where the adolescent crime rate increases within the hours of 2pm and 6pm.  But more importantly, and what I have been able to observe and come to unde stand during my field work hours, it is a place that kids can feel a sense of ownership and comfort.

Most of the days that I went to the Boys and Girls Club I got to work with 6&7 year olds and 8&9 year olds.  And when I say work, I really mean hang out.  Ryan, the Art Director and Mass Art Alum would usually have some type of coloring/painting/drawing activity set up for them, and the students would pretty much have free reign from there.  If they had homework to get done, then that space would transform into an area for a student to do their homework, and Ryan, his assistant Kern, or I would help the student complete their homework.

From this, you can see that the environment is one that is very laid back.  Later in the night, after 6pm, Ryan offers more involved activities for some of the older students like screen printing or ceramics.  Ryan feels that at this time of the day its vital to work with the teens because the younger kids aren’t there to distract his attention since part of running an after school program is the primary “care” aspect.

Some of the different highlights that I have from my field work at the Boys and Girls Club revolve around food and entertainment.  Last week they hosted a Thanksgiving dinner for all of the kids and faculty.  The teen center at the Boys and Girls Club actually has a recording studio and is very focused on the performing arts, so several of the teens did various performances.  Some sang, some rapped, one student did both-very well-, and there was also a dance group that did a few performances.  This was a really great way for me experience the type of community that gets built within the walls of the Boys and Girls Club.  Parents were invited as well to join the dinner and watch the show, which I think is a vital experience for the club to provide because its an opportunity for parents to connect with the things these kids are so passionate about- the things that they dedicate time to.  It’s hard to imagine when a lot of the parents have the opportunity  and time to get to know they’re children because they are in school all day, and then at the Boys and Girls Club for most of the evening.  These types of events allow for those connections to be made.

It was also great to see how Ryan interacted with a lot of the kids at the Boys and Girls Club that may not even step foot inside of the art room.  In the interview that I conducted with Ryan for my final presentation, Ryan talks about how important it is for him to make a connection with both kids inside his room, and kids that he doesn’t see coming into the art room.  There isn’t a difference for him; everyone is s priority.  Ryan has even collaborated with one of the kids at the Boys and Girls Club-Obama- who is an eleven-year-old aspiring rap artist.  They recorded a song together; this is just one of the ways that Ryan finds opportunities to connect with kids outside of the art room. Whether it be a student who’s interested in music or computers, he makes a point to show every kid that he cares.

As I have discussed in my previous blogs, the idea of access is one that I concern myself with, and have found it to connect to many of the sites we have visited throughout the semester; whether it be art practice related or field practice related.

While discussing my idea for my presentation in class I was able to narrow it down from a general understanding of who gets to experience what to making more of a connection to an understanding of contemporary art and how it relates to teaching.  Take any given space, for example the Mills Gallery and the Residue Drawing Show, and recall that experience.  I remember when I didn’t have an experience to recall when looking at art; it was very intimidating for me to even look at the work, I figured I wasn’t doing it right.  I didn’t seek someone out within the space because I didn’t think I had the vocabulary to engage in conversation about the work; it wasn’t a natural experience for me.  Looking at art, especially contemporary art was a foreign experience to me, not having been exposed to that experience before my college career began.

Learning how to look at art, and how to talk about it later informed my own work within my studio.  It was vital to understanding where I was going to place myself within the cannon.  This is very similar to teaching to me especially since I have been fortunate enough to have the opportunity to work with Massart Alum Ryan Davis at the Boys Girls Club in Dorchester.  This feeling of not being allowed or not being knowledgeable enough occurs very often in an environment like the Boys and Girls Club.  These kids are inner city students, and the primary reason why Boys and Girls Club of America was established was to take kids off the streets and give them a place to be safe after school.  In an environment that was designed based off these notions packs a whole lot of socio-political and historical charge behind it that a suburban white privileged child does not have to factor into their experience.

An institution like this is built upon the idea of creating environments that break and hopefully prevent the cycle of violence and misfortune students have in an urban community.  This is where you start-by creating an environment, where as in a more privileged environment, this already exists.  So the space is established, now how do you make sure that space is providing children and teens with opportunities that will guarantee their success?  How do you get students to have a conversation about art-an understanding about art- when you’re primary concern is keeping them safe from the very community they live in?  How do you make art and its possibilities accessible to your students?  These are the very challenges that places like The Boys and Girls Club, Artists for Humanity, and the New Media Center at the ICA try to tackle.

My presentation will focus mostly on interviewing Ryan Davis, the Art Director at the Boys and Girls Club, and possibly Joe at the ICA and connecting their challenges with opening the door to conversations and being those individuals that make it possible for students to feel knowledgeable or allowed in an art space.  Helping students develop a sense of ownership in the arts by creating opportunities connects to my understanding of contemporary art because in order to understand contemporary art you have to have the tools and the opportunity to utilize those tools.  Contemporary Art is not designed in a hierarchy, although many people choose to treat and discuss it as such.  You must understand your own relevance in order to understand its relevance to the world around you; a world that you too occupy, and that you deserve to be an active commentator and producer in.

Both visits to the ICA and Artists for Humanity were absolutely eye opening as far as discovering art programs out side of school environments and opportunities for teens in Boston.  I personally find it absolutely amazing knowing that an institution like the ICA is so invested in the teen population of greater Boston, and holds priority in making teens not only feel welcome at the ICA, but also feel as if it’s a space that they can establish a sense of ownership.

The idea of getting teens to come out to the ICA, and the struggle to accomplish that was interesting to hear about because it is definitely an institution with a specific stigma, and reaching out to the urban demographic that the program is intended for was clearly something that the institution had to address and tackle as a challenge.  Joe explained how a natural lure didn’t exist for teens, especially teens from the greater Boston area to come to he ICA.  This is an understanding that holds the institution itself responsible, and the type of attitude that I don’t believe is  common when understanding ideas of accessibility in urban communities.

This idea of access is definitely one that I feel has been an underlying issue for me this semester, and will continue to press on my mind as an educator.  Seeing what places like the ICA do in order to ensure that they are serving the community properly, and catering to the young people of Boston, and not only to the average white middle to upper class visitor that most art institutions cater to is vital to my understanding of the role I need to be playing as an educator.

Knowing that addressing the under representation of students of color within art institutions is a relevant concern in places like the ICA and Artists For Humanity, helps me to understand where I will fit in as an educator because these are some of my very own concerns.  Artists for Humanity presents an opportunity that I would have killed for as a high school student.  It is honestly one of the more impressive artful environments that I believe Boston has to offer for teens and professional artists alike.  At the ICA teens are being taught still as students in areas that they may not have access to in their own schools.  At AFH, students are given the responsibility to create as a paid collaborator and therefor treated as professionals.  Both are vital to preparing teens to consider art as not only an interest, but as a legitimate means of living.

The goal of both places is not just to get students to come, but to have them engage, pursue, commit, understand their artistic visions and provide them the means and mentorship in order for them to succeed.  These opportunities are not necessarily the ones they may be experiencing in the schools they attend, and the movement to accomplish these goals outside of school seems to be the correct one.  Our responsibility as educators is to address and tackle, in an innovative manner, the road blocks that are holding students back from an education they deserve to experience.  The New Media Center for teens at the ICA, and AFH do this, and they do it well.

I can’t help but think about our first class and the discussion about the overarching theme of interaction we’ve been asked to investigate throughout our work and experiences in this course while reflecting back on our visit to the Mills Gallery at the Boston Center for the Arts in the South End.  The idea behind the show lies in one word, the title of the show: Residue.  Jen has prompted us to investigate the residue we as viewers leave behind when we are looking at work within a specific environment.  In the case of the drawing show, Residue, in the Mills Gallery we are given the opportunity to view and experience the work with breathing room that isn’t necessarily always present within show like this.

Our interaction with this work is one way of considering the word residue.  What resonates to us, whether it be a specific piece, a detail within a piece, or a moment that we spend thinking about and discussing the piece becomes what we leave behind in a gallery space.  When we think about the shows that have existed within the Mills Gallery prior to the Residue Show, especially the 21 drawing shows that the Mills Gallery has served as a showcase for, it is interesting to consider what the residue of those shows were.  We should also take into consideration the residue of the show left on our conscious because not only are creating an impact within the space, but the inverse is occurring as well.  The work, the space, the concepts inspire us, opens a new direction, informs our ideas about art and about creating objects, etc.

The conversations about the ideas of what a drawing show should be, and what they have been within this particular gallery have been housed by the Mills Gallery, and now the Residue show and the work that comprises the show becomes a part of that conversation.

As an artist it is vital to understand the conversation that exist in the current moment.  When you create work, and decide to show that work within a space, you must be aware of the ideas that that space commits itself to.  In a way a gallery’s residue can often be its reputation, and that reputation can result in the way you are represented as an artist.  Understanding the idea of residue within the drawing show has actually allowed me to understand the idea of activating and interacting with art work within a space.  Being able to discuss the process of creating a show like Residue has also allowed me to think beyond the surface of artist and viewer communication with the third party of an object.

One key difference that I found the work at The Sackler Museum compared to the work of El Putnam, although they both deal with the subject of the body, is the way the body is preceived as well as how it is represented.  Putnam explained an emphasized her focus and study of mark making, and has found a way of speaking about these ideas through using her own body.  Often her works, performance based, involve some medium whether it be chalk or bubbles, paint, etc where she is using either her entire body or just her feet or arms to create marks with these mediums.  The performance, and the marks left behind or changed throughout the performance then become the work and the viewer is left with a history of mark making.

It seems to make sense as a contemporary concept to actually utilize the physical body in your work if you are trying to create conversation about the body.  The presence of the body is always a factor in performance art, an the space it is occupying always comes into question.  Puntam stated that she likes to use performance “as a platform to investigate and research,” and it often seems that the performances are just that.  She sets herself up in a space where she can use her body freely to create; the final product is not necessarily the priority, where the actual performative process becomes more informative to her.

The Sackler Museum provides a space for art that represents the physical body with its actual absence.  Felix Gonzalez Torres’ Untitled (Last Light) greets you as you walk into the gallery, and in this piece an actual physical object represents a body. In particular, the bulbs represent individuals whose lives are threatened by AIDS.  As the lights die out in the permenant installation we are reminded of the lives that are lost due to this disease.  Felix Gonzalez Torres explores the idea of representing the body through an object to communicate a larger concept and commentary on a global issue and concern, that affected his every day life. 

The Sackler Museum houses work that allows us to explore ideas about the human body and the figure without its actual physical presence.  Abstraction of the figure like Leonard Baskin’s wood-cut print, The Hydrorgen Man, allow us to think about how the body is made up compositionaly, and how we stil recognize the human figure throughout the history of art no matter if the representation is distorted or realistic.  Some of the sculputral work is still translated to us as figurative because the history of representation of the human body.  A lot of the Work in the Sacklet Museum has an implied physical sense of the humn body, but Putnam’s work actually utilizes the physical body, and the implication now becomes what is literally confronting you in the space.

Putnam concerns herself with mark making the body has the capability to produce within a certain space and specific medium in a certain frame of time, while many of the artists, like Feliz Gonzalez Torres, suggest a more permenant state of represenation.

Yesterday we started our day off at the MFA withs students from Swampscott High School, and I was in a group with Dani and Jon.  We had about eight or nine students and, to my surprise, they all really enjoyed the Contemporary Wing over the American Wing.  Dani, Jon, and I went in thinking that the students were not going to connect as much with the art in the Contemporary Wing, and be more drawn to the quality of representation and realism in the early American work.  We started with the Contemporary Wing, and made a point to have the students focus on the ideas and conversations that the work produced instead of trying to get all of the information merely by observing the piece.  We actually spent a little bit longer of a time in the contemporary exhibit because we found that the students were engaging with the work a lot more than we expected.  One thing that I did wish we had was more time; I did feel like we had to rush through the three floors of the American Wing because we didn’t have enough time, and the students really didn’t get enough time to sit in front of one piece for an extended period of time to get some sketching in.  I do feel that the overall goal of art appreciation was accomplished for the students in the field trip because, although most of them stated they took art as just “another elective to cross off the list” they seemed to actually want to look at the work, and actually engage in somewhat of a conversation about what they were looking at.

Because my experience with Gary from BAA was a lot more one on one (literally), I did get to appreciate that time a little more, and the fact that he is looking to pursue Art as a career didn’t hurt either.  I consider the group from Swamscott Highschool, the average public school experience of art, where the students from BAA express a great passion for art in general.  It was definitely informative to interact with the two demographics in the same day because I find myself being a lot more bias toward the students from BAA, and wanting to engage in more detailed and extensive conversations with them because of their already fostered ideas of art as a profession.  I know that this is not the case in many public school settings, but I was actually very impressed by the students’ language when dicussing Shahzia Sikander’s work both inside and outside of the gallery.  I know that from my high school experience, I did not posses the capability that a lot of the BAA students do in not only discussing art work, but looking at it as well.

I was paired up with Gary, who is actually interested in applying to Massart as well as RISD and Pratt.  He actually had a lot of questions as far as what my experience was, and is concerned with declaring a major because he is stuck between architecture, painting, and graphic design, which I assured him is a common case with most Massart students.

I really enjoyed the more laid back feel to getting to know the student I was paired up with, and also taking our time around the Shahzi Sikander show to discuss the work.  This experience for me was much more like a mentoring process, and I definitely want to figure out how to post on Gary’s blog because I would love to be able to dedicate some more time to helping him out through his college application process.

I found that taking the time to let the conversation develop between you and a student is much more important than trying to navigate the conversation in such a way that you get very calculated answers back from a student. I felt comfortable letting Gary guide the conversation and then picking my cues in the conversation from the things he was interested in about  the work in Sikander’s work.

I came upon this article today on my Twitter Time Line, and thought it was pretty appropriate especialy for some of the conversations we’ve been having as far as acces and contemporary teaching opportunites outside the school setting.  You can find it in the Arts sections of Friday’s (10/21/11) Boston Globe.  The article features ICA Director Jill Medvedow and MFA Director Malcom Rogers discussing the role their institutions have, are, and will be playing in the showcase of contemporary art.  I’m not sure if this is the full article, but it’s what I could get access to online.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/arts/2011/10/21/jill-medvedow-ica-and-malcolm-rogers-mfa-conversation/9NkRr3aCN6EuW2sYsyeTcO/story.html

For any of you that have twitter you can follow me @DoBetterBluez and also follow the ICA if you don’t already @ICAinBOSTON = )

Even though the new plan is to have our students choose one painting/object from each exhibit and sketch their interpretaion of it, I still think it’s a good idea to stick to my group’s original plan of going in a specific chronological order.  I think it will be interesting for the students to start in the colonial section of the American Wing, and have them work their way up to Modern American Art, and then the Contemporary Wing.  Because, as Beth mentioned, the students will most likely find the Contemporary Wing the hardest to work out and understand, I think it’s best to save it until teh end and creata more emphasis on talking with the students about the various types of work, from 2d to 3d to the videos by Calson and Strom, and especialy Felix Gonzalez- Torres’ interactive beaded curtain piece.  I think it would benefit the students to sketch people actually interacting with pieces like this instead of sketching the pieces themselves.  It will alow them to really understand the concepts of where these works are coming from and allow for that conversation to develop. 

In order for them to talk about and begin to understand the work in the contemporary wing that is, in my opinion, more thought provoking and harder to break down than the work in the Early American Wing, they have to approach it with a different lense.  I think my group agrees that the Contemporary Wing should be a time when instead of focusing on sketching from sitting in front of the piece, the students will need to be challanged to sketch their reactions to the work, and how they observe other people interacting with the work, so that more conversation can arise out of their experience in that particular space.