My Favorite Designer

My favorite designer is Dieter Rams, who led the design at Braun for many years. I pinned his 10 principles of good design on my cork board. "Good design is as little design as possible," is my favorite principle.

Learn more about Rams and his 10 principles.

MFA Lecture series - extra credit

Graduate Lecture Series, Fall 2013  The USC Roski School of Fine Arts is pleased to announce its Fall 2013 Graduate Lecture Series, featuring weekly, in-depth presentations by internationally recognized artists, curators, and writers in an intimate setting that fosters critical conversation. Free and open to the public.  roski.usc.edu/calendar/

August 28: Tala Madani, Artist 12-2pm Graduate Fine Arts Building (IFT) September 11: The Propeller Group, Art Collective 12-2pm Graduate Fine Arts Building (IFT) September 25: Oscar Tuazon, Artist 12-2pm Graduate Fine Arts Building (IFT) October 2: Lara Schnitger, Artist 12-2pm Graduate Fine Arts Building (IFT) October 9: Barbara T. Smith, Artist 7-9pm Wong Auditorium (HAR) October 16: K8 Hardy, Artist 7-9pm Wong Auditorium (HAR) October 23: Michael Ned Holte, Critic, Writer 7-9pm Wong Auditorium (HAR) October 30: Alexandra Grant, Artist 12-2pm USC Fisher Museum (HAR) November 6: Susan Silton, Artist 12-2pm USC Fisher Museum (HAR) November 13: Elad Lassry, Artist 12-2pm Graduate Fine Arts Building (IFT) November 20: Hito Steyerl, Artist, Theorist, Writer 12-2pm Graduate Fine Arts Building (IFT) December 4: Wu Tsang, Artist 12-2pm Graduate Fine Arts Building (IFT) December 9: Merlin Carpenter, Artist 12-2pm Graduate Fine Arts Building (IFT)

Flow Chart

EXTRA CREDIT EVENTS 

1.     Eric Wesley, Artist

I had the opportunity to see Eric Wesley talk at a guest lecture series at the Roski Graduate School of Fine Arts. Wesley earned a B.A. at UCLA and has been exhibited in numerous museums such as the Museum of Contemporary Art, Los Angeles and MOCA Geffen Contemporary, Los Angeles. He is a fascinating character (to say the least).

His nonsensical and rather impulsive approach to art is something that is difficult to match or replicate. For instance, at the lecture, he displayed pictures of him driving. He told how he was accustomed to driving—often taking a rather mundane route, which caused him to travel in a circle. One day he thought,” Why not just go straight?” And so, he did. He described this action, his feeling and impulsive behavior as a “first dimension” that’s “primal, intuitive, and intangible.” He views this type of random action as a "feeling" that you either "get or don't get." I feel like I can relate to this sentiment as I drive a lot, and often wonder what would happen if I didn't follow the path that was set before me. Not only is his style interesting, but it is also quite entertaining to hear how he develops his creative process. His way of thinking and handling his experiential art is off the edge, as it's constructed to break rules of a typical artistic practice (rebellious in nature). Ultimately, impulse and his ability to express a temporary or fleeting feeling seems to be quite important to him. Despite having a wide-range of art projects, he seems to carry this serendipity component throughout his artwork.

As with other artists, he is used to setting rules or guidelines for himself while creating art. For one project, for instance, his rule was that he couldn’t buy anything (meaning that he would have to make something or steal it). Another interesting thing is that he seems to view his artwork as an evolving piece of text or somewhat of a separate entity (something that appears to be disconnected from himself--- it eventually grows outside of or beyond him and his initial conception). Once he looks back on an artwork of his, he doesn’t seem to think the way he previously did about it. In fact, he often says that he “doesn’t see a point” to much of the artwork he has created. In his own words, he states, “I thought it was an artwork at the time, but now I see it as a prop…sometimes art starts off as art then turns into props, and sometimes props start off as props, and then turn into art.” Overall, Wesley definitely has a get-the-ball-rolling, and then “release it” approach to his art, as one can see in his Project, “WTF?” That is, he starts something creative, and sees how far it can go (in this case, with professionals of different materials taking his artwork and transforming it).

Ultimately, Wesley is definitely not something you can find off-the-shelf. His lecture was quite amusing. And I find it fascinating that he likes the way things look on formal pages, so much so that he decided to file for divorce with his fiancé (just to see what the documents look like). His serendipitous style is certainly something to admire.

“This box sculpture is turning into a cube, which is always good for art.” –Eric Wesley

 2.  Mayo Thompson, Musician, Composer

Mayo Thompson is another person I got to see at a guest lecture. Being a musician and visual artist, he apparently co-founded an avant-garde rock band called Red Krayola. During his lecture, he mainly focused on his experience performing and working with Red Krayola at the 2012 Whitney Biennial and its museum installation.

Overall, he read many of his documented notes of his experiences working and about the various performances that he saw while traveling. He showed many of his web chats with individuals across the country and noted its delay between sound and picture (including other object-relations).

 I find it particularly interesting when he stated that there’s something important to acknowledge; that is, there’s a slippage to authenticity. I think that what he means by this is that whether art is tangible or un-tangible (such as a simple song), things shift and change shape. He described this as “entrepreneurial power” like “playing, writing, and singing…they are virtual, just as they are actual.” This notion reminds me of how Wesley views his work as something that is ever-evolving, and how there’s a sense of collaboration when creating and letting go of an art piece.

Overall, while I enjoyed the lecture, Thompson was rather difficult to follow. He would jump around reading his Manifesto that I became lost (concerning what he was talking about) quite often. However, similar to Wesley, he was a likable and humorous character, and it was just a unique experience to have the chance to analyze how his mind operated.

“Aesthetics made in form of essays.” –Mayo Thompson

3.     Tania Bruguera, Artist

We talked about the purpose of art quite often in class. Much of what Bruguera does, reminds me of our class discussions. Her work seems to have great purpose or intent for social change (a type of “useful art”). A Cuban artist, she is the founder and director of the first performance and art studies program in Cuba. Needless to say, she is very political in her performative art projects. Joining art with everyday political life, she creates a public space to share ideas, ultimately transforming the “viewer” into something much more active and charged. One of her long term projects is the “Immigrant Movement International,” which involves engaging communities (both at the local and international level), social service organizations, other artists, and the political realm to focus on immigration reform.

I particularly like how Brugeura centers much of her work around the contradictions that are in politics (primarily, the contradictions of the representation or perception of immigrants). After listening to her lecture, I believe that Bruguera is striving to transform peoples’ view on immigrants---to not classify them or view others as simple immigrants, but to understand that people are citizens of this world. Similar to the other artists I have talked about, she stresses the importance of collaboration in her art projects (which I find fascinating since this seems to be a unifying element among various artists). However, I find Brugeura's work particularly inspiring because of the role she places on her art projects (to heighten art to a more meaningful place in terms of life-altering acts).

Even when laws have been written down,
they ought not always to remain unaltered.
-Aristotle.

4. Huey Copeland, Art Historian 

 I didn't have a lot of time to stay for Copeland's lecture. However, I found his research and discourse incredibly thought-provoking. Overall, he talked about women artists and blackness in multicultural America. His upcoming book is something that seems to be receiving quite a bit or praise. It deals with how slavery has impacted art in America, thereby arguing for a fresh look or a re-shaping (set of attitudes and beliefs) on how race is positioned in art history. 

Needless to say, much of his work is culture-based and encompasses twentieth century sculpture, the role of gender in cultural discourse, and sexual difference. His work reminds me a lot of what I learned in my Communication classes, especially when it come to the role of the female form (in relation to its subjects/gaze, setting, and temperament of the time). After going to various lectures, I feel as though his work and Bruguera's practices connect or relate in that they both have a transformatory mission imbedded within their work; that is, to change the mindset(s) of those who read their pieces and to better the world both on a local and large scale. 

Much of what I like about these last two artists is that their practice is constructive and instrumental. In other words, they see art as a world-making practice (something of which I hold high regard for). While some of his work and what he talks about can be a little jarring, Copeland seems to be deeply passionate about where marginalized people are unsuitably fixed in Western popular culture. I particularly like how he seemed the type to prefer exchanging ideas rather than actually giving a lecture.  

5. MOCA MUSEUM --HAPPY SHOW 

--Too hilarious not to post.

MOCA Exhibition

I couldn't find the Sagmeister exhibit, so I enjoyed the Urs Fischer one instead.
The Urs Fischer exhibit is on display from April 21st to August 19th. I found these three exhibits particularly interesting.

Bread House                          Portrait of a Single Raindrop

The Untitled piece with a house made of bread has the appearance of a cabin constructed of bread. The long baguette pieces act as structural timbers, while the sliced pieces look like the running bond of masonry bricks. Upon a closer look, the piece is actually constructed of wood and merely covered and filled with bread. I think the piece would have been much more interesting if it were solely constructed of bread, but there are probably structural limitations to how well stale bread can hold itself up.

The Portrait of a Single Raindrop is a huge 'hole in the wall.' I love how the negative piece is resting against the wall in the back, supporting the idea that 'nothing' is wasted. The rough cut of the wall really reveals the massing and draws attention to the structural light gauge steel.

The juxtaposition of these two pieces becomes an interesting way of drawing attention to the architectural structure of construction. The bread shows the concept of connections made by tectonic pieces, while the Portrait of a Single Raindrop becomes a cutaway expression with the lack of structure. 

 
Suspended Line of Fruit

This Untitled piece contains a line of fruit that is elegantly suspended only inches from the ground. Each of the six pieces of fruit hangs from a thin, clear string that is attached to the ceiling. Although the fruits are in sequential order by size, the grape at the end (or beginning) of the line is barely noticeable. As the fruits age and rot, it's clever how the fruits are suspended so that ants won't crawl on them; however, this is in a museum, so they probably make sure there are no insects to disrupt these art pieces.

Getty Museum: LA Overdrive exhibit

Two weeks ago I visited the Getty Museum in Los Angeles, to see the Overdrive exhibit. The Overdrive exhibit shows what city planners and civil engineers, from the 1940s to the 1990s, thought the future of LA would look like. The exhibit is filled with blue prints and miniature models of buildings and landmarks of how buildings would change and adapt a higher population and changes in modes of transportation. For instance, one of the drawings depicted how LAX airport would change to accommodate more people and how the style of the buildings would change. 

As you can see the design of the LAX theme building was adopted. However, next to the picture was a model of what the entire airport would look like and it was clear that the only part that still exists was the theme building. Though the design of the theme building was futuristic, the architects neglected to predict how much of a necessity parking lots would be in the future. Within the airport the model only had a paved surface to accommodate parking, as opposed to the plethora of parking lots that exist currently. I found this to be very interesting, because it should how impossible it is to predict what the future will look like. 

Another part of the exhibit that I found fascinating, and which I later asked my city planning professor to explain to me, was a picture drawn by a civil engineer depicting elevated sidewalks. 

I was intrigued by the picture, because the caption stating the advantages of the elevated sidewalk seemed logical. Still, I had never heard nor seen any city which implemented the design. Upon asking my professor he told me that in fact a few cities had implemented the design, but none had lasted because the elevated sidewalks did not make anything more efficient and actually made the use of the car more appealing. Therefore not only did elevated sidewalks cost an incredible amount of money, but they also reinforced the opposite of what they were meant to do, which was promote more walking.

Overall, I thought the exhibit was incredibly interesting and it showed just how impossible it is to accurately assess what the future will look like. While the parts of the exhibit that do exist today were interesting to see, I found that the most interesting parts of the exhibit were the things that do not exist. It was like a behind the scenes look at all the failed ways of innovation, which in theory were very interesting and creative, but had not place in reality. The elevated sidewalks for instance, in theory were the solution to stopping the increase in car use, but in reality did the exact opposite. Finally, the exhibit showed me that similarly to the way people in the 1940s thought the design of the city would be different, so we think that the cities in the future will be different in all kinds of ways, but for the most part the way in which we perceive cities to change are incorrect and it is things that we do not expect that make the real changes. 

Flow Chart San Francisco