I noticed that no one has posted this thread for everyone to respond yet, so I'm putting it up.
One person has appeared to have responded in their own post, but I figured there needed to be a big thread where everyone can respond to either one of the readings for this week. I hope everyone sees it in time for the deadline.
I found Kandinsky's thoughts about color and spirit particularly interesting because of the way humans perceive color. Some people in the world do not see in color, while others see some colors, but not others. It is also thought that the way that we as individuals perceive color is different. What blue looks like to me may be totally different than what blue looks like to somebody else. On page 39, Kandinsky says the following, "...white, although often considered as no color, is a symbol of a world from which all colour as a definite attribute has disappeared. This world is too far above us for its harmony to touch our souls. A great silence, like an impenetrable wall, shrouds its life from our understanding....It is not a dead silence, but one pregnant with possibilities. White has the appeal of the nothingness that is before birth, of the world in the ice age." The interesting fact about the color white is that it isn't perceived by the human mind as nothingness, but as all the colors projected on top of each other. In reality, white isn't silence, but a cacophony that the brain cannot comprehend. The middle to end of this quote touches on the idea that white is a type of silence, which supports the current belief on this perception of color. Today, white is a symbol of purity and innocence. How did this symbol evolve if Kandinsky believes that it represents nothingness and the brain thinks it represents cacophony?
ReplyDeleteWhile Kandinsky often focuses on the impact of primarily art itself, I thought he also makes very fascinating connections between images and language. At the top of page 15, he describes a harmony that is created between words and the art they are describing: “This inner harmony springs partly, perhaps principally, from the object which it names. But if the object is not itself seen, but only its name heard, the mind of the hearer receives an abstract impression only, that is to say as of the object dematerialized, and a corresponding vibration is immediately set up in the heart.” The connection Kandinsky makes between what the mind understands to be true from past experience and the heart’s emotional reaction to not only the art interpreted, but also to the understanding of the word is interesting. He goes on to explain that the abstractness of art is often materialized and vice versa based off of the language used to describe what should not be discussed. I think that his ideas about the use of art to induce a particular full body experience is thought-provoking.
ReplyDeleteKandinsky went into a lot of detail about different colors, and exactly what emotions they evoke from viewers, the symbols they each represent. I thought the specificity with which he described these colors, and the almost scientific presentation of the charts showing exactly how much movement or motion came from each of these colors changed the way his paintings should be viewed especially. He takes a lot of time to say that artists should create art that is outside of the physical realm, with no specific subjects or impressions. Looking just at the cover, his artwork really seems chaotic. Reading the book I realized how methodical his painting was. Each color has specific meaning when attached to any other color. Shapes all mean different things, and their meaning can change based on color as well. His paintings then seem almost like an oxymoron, a method to produce chaos. That being said, I think it’s important to note that his interpretations of what color means are very subjective, and every person has experience that cause them to think about color in a personalized way, which could lead to new interpretations of art. The viewer plays as much a role in the interpretation as the artist does.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhile finishing up the reading from Bechdel, I felt like the mood of the book changed a little bit. She goes into more detail about the relationship about her father and how she once tried to connect with him about personal dilemma they both were dealing with. Although, the attempt failed, she goes to say that maybe she was not right about him just being gay, and that he could have been something different. By the end, I felt a little more sympathy for her father than I had after I read the first half of the book. You can see a softer side of him when he says to her, on page 199, that she is the only one worth teaching in the class. It shows that he started to respect her as an intellectual, and that thought continues to grow throughout the end of the book. The interaction between her and her dad on page 204 shows him in a flannel shirt for the first time, and he does not look as mad or annoyed with her as he usually did. He is helping her with picking out books, which was a source of conversation between them. Lastly, we he attempted to take her to a gay bar with him, I feel like he really wanted to open up to her and connect on another level but was never afforded the opportunity. Did anyone else feel somewhat sorry for the father by the end of the reading?
ReplyDeleteConcerning the Spiritual in Art by Wassily Kandinsky discusses the message of a piece of artwork throughout time. The book talks about how at one period of time a piece could make no sense or seem primitive, whereas in another period of time, it could be seen as a stepping stone towards the way things are in that time period. He also mentions that when making art, the artist has to choose whether they want to have the piece displayed for the current day or if they want it to be expressing a timeless message. Wassily is mostly concerned with the spiritual messages that a piece conveys so there is more of a focus on timeless messages rather that inner circle jokes or references.
ReplyDeleteKandinsky has a reoccurring theme which involves the freedom to express art. A paragraph on page 17 describes the limit of freedom as “Every age achieves a certain measure of this freedom, but beyond the boundaries of its freedom the mightiest genius can never go.” Pairing the idea that art is a reflection of the inner soul suggests that people can enlarge their freedom by being more aware of their spirituality. Kandinsky goes on to say that music is the best medium to portray art and that artists mold different forms of art into one. If this is the case, wouldn’t the ceiling of expression be in how the artists displays the work rather than if it is humanly possible to achieve? This may dive into the area where how can something be displayed to the full potential if that level of artistry can’t be conceived. The final product might be what the artist intended to make, but there isn’t a true way to scale something as perfect when it is a reflection of the soul.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSo in Fun Home I found the part where she was talking about The Importance of Being Earnest to be very interesting. In a book a bout her father, she took considerable time to talk about a play that her mother was in. It becomes clear why she's mentioning it when she gives some background of Oscar Wilde, the pay's author. "Now I know it was right after The Importance opened on Valentine's Day, 1895, that Wilde's trials began. He'd just returned from Algiers, where he and Alfred Douglas had been disporting themselves with local boys... Then Wilde was tried for committing indecent acts and sent to prison while both The Importance and The Ideal Husband were playing to full houses." So, while this chapter talks about her mother being in The Imprtance, it is titled after the other one of Wilde's plays that was popular while he was in trial. The chapter also talks about the trouble with the law they were in because her father had been accused of buying an underage boy beer, a parallel to the legal troubles that Wilde was facing due to his own homosexuality. One thing about Wilde's history the book doesn't mention, but I think is interesting and relevant, is that Wilde himself was married to a woman and had children even though he was homosexual. I think this part of history is an even further parallel to her own father's. The difference in the outcomes of each person is that Wilde was sent to prison and lost his wife and children and any money from his work, while her father simply had to go to therapy and wouldn't lose anything until much later when his wife filed for divorce and he committed suicide.
ReplyDeleteSomething that I found very interesting in Fun Home was the connection that forms between Alison and her father after their discussion in the car on page 220-221. He finally admits to her that he has an underlying homosexual tendency and this changes the dynamic of their relationship, or at least adds a certain aspect. Through a lot of the book Alison has described how her father was distant and sort of fear-inspiring to her through childhood, but now that he is able to draw a parallel to her in shared experience the tone with which Alison talks about him changes. There is now something that makes them equal and relatable. She doesn't really see him as that cold man from years past but someone who she could try to unravel to find answers to questions she's always had. This leads them to become close, at least in her words. On page 225, a visitor to their house remarks how "unnaturally" close they seem. This is intriguing, especially since Alison emphasizes her father's distant nature through so much of the book. Something that many people may consider scary to bring up to their parents ends up bringing her as close to her father as she has ever been.
ReplyDeleteIn Kandinsky, I think the section on color and form is really interesting to read about. Color can’t stand alone whereas form can and serves as the line between surfaces of color. It’s intriguing to see that some colors are soft or sharp based off forms, warm or cool, and the influences each element provides. Through these, an inner feeling is formed. Figures I and II on pages 37 and 38 are diagrams of the movement of color and form. Although confusing, the explanations and relationships shown are really thought provoking. I’m wondering what the correct explanation for it is.
ReplyDeleteIn Kandinsky, I believe he really focusing on the connection between color and emotion. In some way, art need the emotion inside itself, otherwise art will be something cheap. There are two colors which impressed me --- black and blue. Black expresses a hopeless, deep, and quiet situation, it is a color close to death. Blue is different. If blue close to black, it shows the most sorrowful emotion. If blue close to white, it will be the color of sky. From Kandinsky, I can say that color is the best way to express emotion in art.
ReplyDeleteMy comment this time have little to do with the actual reading itself. It is about a debate that I had with a friend about Bechdel. My friend called her a "middle/upper class whiner". His argument was that every family has issues and Bechdel's father not only stayed with her throughout her childhood, but also put food on the table and a roof over her head, a gorgeous one it is. I, on the other hand, admires Bechdel's positive outlet of her family issues. She became a famous author and cartoonist using her own experiences as fuels. She also invented the Bechdel test, a gender bias test that analyzes if a work of fiction features at least two named female characters who talk to each other about something other than a man. It is fascinating to see what a small portion of film, especially big budgeted blockbusters pass the test. A great number of films that passed this test has feminism as a theme and/or had a heroine instead of hero. To my surprise, popular "feminist" show Sex and the City about four women's friendship, does not pass the Bechdel test because the four women only talk about men throughout the show. We have a long and touch journey ahead to gender equality and Bechdel is helping us realize that.
ReplyDeleteIn rereading Bechdel, I have become more and more interested in how she uses myths and literary references to provide further insight into her relationship with her father. Some of the very first words we hear from her are describing the story of Icarus and Daedalus. She relates both of these characters to her father. She may be using these references as a roundabout way of revealing his character to the readers while only a few pages into the graphic novel. Implicit in these stories are character traits, failures, and major themes that she may have wanted others to associate with him. I certainly believe that having access to these literary resources while she was growing up contributed to what characteristics of her father she noticed. By using them in her discussion of Bruce, I believe she is letting viewers see her father through the same filters that she had as a young adult.
ReplyDeleteFocusing on Bechdel's comic, I am interested in the depiction of the father. It seems that throughout the novel Bechdel draws her father in darker clothing, or physically higher than the rest of the scene's inhabitants. Considering the characteristics she ascribes to her father, this imagery makes sense. This is especially apparent in the beginning pages of the book. He appears wearing dark clothing, then standing on a ladder, or lastly isolated in the scene, separate from the rest. This raises other questins about her father's depiction. Namely, her father without a shirt. Does it relate to questions of his sexuality? Is it simply something that truly depicts her father? What else does it symbolize or say? I look forward to exploring these ideas further as I reread Bechdel.
ReplyDelete