A Portrait of Thought

Post your review of the MFA Thesis Exhibit (Museum of Fine Arts):


In showcasing the culmination of work by five WSU Master of Fine Arts graduate candidates, the 2009 Master of Fine Arts Thesis Exhibition accentuated notion that every artist has a distinctive style and that unique meanings are to be derived from his/her art. Upon entering the gallery, I was exposed to what appeared to be an assortment of unconnected culminations of art. While the pieces of each artist were professionally situated around the room, they were chaotic and inconsistent in meaning, style, and form. The lack of conformity between each artist detracted from being able to derive a meaningful take home message. Relationships between each of five artist’s art were skin-deep at best, in that the only commonality appeared to be that they were all students at Washington State University.

As a student majoring in neuroscience, I have been taught, when locating an unknown structure in my neuro-anatomy lab, to begin by first identifying a familiar area of the brain. I believe the same concept applies to extracting meaning out of art. At the exhibition, the art of each artist appeared to drift into different realm of meaning and representation, making it fitting that each pool of work was isolated to one side of the gallery by empty wall space. In attempting to extract value from the exhibit, I started by identifying pieces of art that I could relate with.

Immediately, the work of Brad Dinsmore resonated with me. On his website he described that his work “creates a context where the mood or general feeling can be understood, but like a memory the more you focus on it or try to understand the specifics, the more elusive it becomes.” His pieces had a consistent theme revolving around the impact that thought and memory have on mood and the execution of emotion.

In Converging Thoughts (included above), Dinsmore uses a combination of scribbles and doodles to represent individual thoughts and memories. Consistent with modern day science which suggests that the creativity is predominated by the right side of the brain, I interpreted the colorful squiggles, above the man’s right hemisphere, to represent creative thought and unrestricted imagination. I perceived the black doodles, above the man’s left hemisphere, to represent comprehendible memories and analytical thought as the outlines of a hand and even a bird could be recognized. In the portrait, it is the confrontation of creative thought and rational memories that create knowledge and emotion. The man’s preponderance of knowledge and emotional content are the consequence of his converging ideas.

My interpretation is further supported in Dinsmore’s Problems of Knowledge, Letting Go, and Learning to See. In Problems of Knowledge, knowledge is again represented by the intertwining of black and colorful squiggles between the hands in the piece. What separates this piece from Converging Thoughts is that the colorful squiggles are only shades of green. I believe that Dinsmore uses specific colors to thoughts that evoke distinct emotions. Although there is no indication of the category of mood in Problems of Knowledge, the title suggests that green may induce a “problematic” emotional state of disorientation and confusion.

The portrait Letting Go, the man has yellow, green, and black forms hovering over his head. He appears to be in a pondering state of confusion and confliction as to how to let go of the knowledge lurking above him. Interestingly, the man appears to be comfortable with his mood, which is suggestive that yellow stimulates a level of satisfaction and content. The piece is consistent with Problems of Knowledge, where I interpreted green to represent an emotional state of confusion. I’d imagine that red would convey an angry emotional state and blue a sad mood if similar paintings of Dinsmore were accessible.

While I did not derive a meaningful take home message from the exhibit as a whole due to its incoherent and distractive nature, I did find the work of Brad Dinsmore to be evocative and significant. Dinsmore’s collection illustrated the physical representation of a manifestation of thoughts. With squiggles, scribbles, and doodles, Dinsmore played with the philosophy that thought is real and that only its physical form is an illusion. Often we as a society fail to recognize the value and shear existence of thoughts in nature because we cannot see them nor are we exposed to the hidden fantasies of others. Dinsmore sheds a beautiful light on thought and its influence on mood, making the viewer more aware that he/she is the one ultimately in control of emotional state in which he/she lives.

Image Above:
Brad Dinsmore
Converging Ideas (2009)
Charcoal and Crayon on paper

Freudian Analysis of Madonna

Which of the following artists/fictional protagonists (a. Spiderman, b. Jackson Pollock, c. Madonna) lends him/herself to a Freudian/Foucaultian analysis and why? Choose one for a brief Foucaultian/Freudian analysis.

For the purposes of this assignment, I believe Madonna lends herself to a Freudian analysis. In the “Revelation of the Poet to Day-Dreaming,” Freud explained his perception of the relationship between art and the human unconscious process. He focused on how a poet’s art was a reflection of his/her day-dreams and unconscious processes. As a professional singer,
Madonna’s songs represent a form of poetry, making her a prime candidate for Freudian theory.

Freudian theory conveyed that the poet is a day-dreamer and that his/her art is the equivalent of a day-dream. He believed, through the assessment of art, one could construe the artist’s unconscious thoughts and suppressed day-dreams.

Madonna’s most popular song, arguably, is “Like a Virgin.” The main chorus of the song is as follows: (for complete lyrics visit http://www.madonnalyrics.org/like_a_virgin.html)

“Like a virgin
Touched for the very first time
Like a virgin
When your heart beats
Next to mine”

On the surface, Madonna’s song “Like a Virgin,” appears to be about a girl who is confused about love after enduring a number of unsuccessful relationships. She is vulnerable and depressed in her bewildered search for love. She then meets a man who then sweeps her off her feet and for the first time, like a virgin engaging in sexual intercourse, she feels unrestricted love.

Using Freudian analysis, one could interpret that “Like a Virgin” clandestinely represents Madonna’s unconscious longing to be protected and cared for by a male figure. The song was her way of unconsciously crying out for someone to protect her with a shield of love. At the time of the song’s conception, it could be interpreted that she was uncertain if love would find her in her fruitless journey and that her day-dreams were engulfed with worrisome feelings. By repressing her day-dreams, Madonna, at a surface level, was able to disconnect her personal day-dreams from the song. Freudian analysis would claim that the song exposed her unconscious instead of concealing her feelings.

Image From: http://media.marketwire.com/attachments/200603/MOD-253305_MadonnaTourPic.jpg

"The Heidi Chronicles"

Discuss “The Heidi Chronicles” from whichever angle you please. You may consider the art/gender issue we have discusses which Heidi is concerned with, e.g. in connection with the above two artworks. Briefly put: does gender determine art? Any notes on the WSU performance?

The two mentioned art works depict a segment from the deuterocanical Book of Judith in which Judith beheads Holofernes. From a historical standpoint, Judith was a Jewish widow of noble rank in Bethulia, a town besieged by the army of the Assyrian general Holofernes. To defeat her captor, Judith seduced Holofernes with her beauty and successfully got him drunk. After Holofernes fell asleep, Judith and her maid Abra beheaded Holofernes with his sword. Judith brought the head back to Bethulia which sent the leaderless Assyrians in fleet. The event marked the Hebrew’s victory.

The paintings are significant to “The Heidi Chronicles” because they illustrate a female heroine who was ultimately rewarded for passionately acting on her beliefs. The paintings glorify Heidi’s lifestyle in which she made sacrifices to advance the interest of the women’s movement. Heidi was a female heroine in that she passionately acted on her values, instead of the expectations of women imposed by society. She forfeited the traditional duties of a wife by never marrying, she advocated for equitable representation of women in the art world, and she empowered her sex by conveying that women are not obligated to conform to social expectations. She expressed that women should aim for their 10 and in fighting to ensure women could without restraint; she lost sight of what her 10 represented. In the end Heidi won as she realized that her efforts had opened doors for women and that her daughter would learn from the mistakes of her mother.

Does gender determine art?

In answering the question I could only wonder if “The Heidi Chronicles” would be any less meaningful if a man had written it. I believe that the play would be less meaningful; hence, while gender does not determine art, it greatly influences it. Until men and women are equal in every aspect there will be a difference, even if it is slight, between art produced by a woman and art produced by a man.

The WSU performance?

I was impressed by the WSU performance. It was a great opportunity to see an entirely different perspective and interpretation on “The Chronicles of Heidi.” When I initially read the play I interpreted the ending as a sorrowful moment in which Heidi seemingly gave up on the pursuit of her happiness and was dissatisfied with Scoop. The WSU performance sold me on their jovial interpretation of the ending in which Heidi appeared satisfied and content with her current position in life.


Image Above:
Judith Beheading Holofernes (1598-1599)
Michelangelo Caravaggio

Jackson Pollock & Tolstoy’s Views of His Work

(1) What do you think of Pollock?

Although initially appearing wild and disorganized, I found Jackson Pollock’s paintings to be aesthetically appealing. Upon first encountering his work, I was attracted by the plethora of colors and the chaos in which each was arranged. I held Pollock’s work to a higher regard after watching videos about how he produced his art and hearing the in-class presentation. The “dripping” technique utilized by Pollock truly enabled him to express himself through his art. Pollock’s art became meaningful in nature after I discovered his struggle against depression and alcoholism.

“When I am in my painting, I'm not aware of what I'm doing. It is only after a sort of 'get acquainted' period that I see what I have been about. I have no fear of making changes, destroying the image, etc., because the painting has a life of its own. I try to let it come through. It is only when I lose contact with the painting that the result is a mess. Otherwise there is pure harmony, an easy give and take, and the painting comes out well.”

The quote above, made by Jackson Pollock, describes the intimacy he shared with each of his pieces. I enjoy Pollock’s art because, beyond being immediately stimulated by the bold colors and seemingly frenzied assembly, his art is a meaningful expression of “self.” His art depicts his battles in life and the boisterous “drip” design expounds the alcoholic state he was in while creating many of his pieces.

(2) Align one of the theorists we've discussed with Pollock.

I chose to align Pollock with the views and opinions of Tolstoy. Tolstoy believed that a piece, in order to quantify as art, must contain the three components of (1) evoking individual feeling in others, (2) having clearness about that feeling, and (3) having sincerity amongst it.

When it comes to critiquing Pollock in Tolstoy’s eyes, Pollock satisfies the first condition of evoking feeling and emotion in others. After watching, “Who the $#%& is Jackson Pollock,” this is evident in Ms. Horton’s emotional connection to a piece of art that she believes Jackson Pollock created. Pollock fulfills the third condition of sincerity amongst his pieces as he was genuine in the intimacy he shared with each piece and was honest about the meaning they had to him.

Tolstoy would unfortunately not hold Pollock’s art in high esteem due to his inability to create art that had a clear obvious meaning. Pollock’s art, although produced strategically and purposefully, appears wild, confusing, and disorganized. The chaotic appearance of layers of multicolored “dripped” paint obstructs the clearness that Tolstoy would have sought to critically qualify Pollock’s work as art.

Image Above: "Unformed Figure," Jackson Pollock, oil and enamel on canvas, 52 inches by 6 feet 5 inches, 1953, Museum Ludwig, Cologne

Nietzsche vs. Tolstoy

Compare/discuss Nietzsche and Tolstoy. Nietzsche talks about "this collapse of principium individuationis" (p. 164) and Tolstoy talks about 'infection': "The stronger the infection the better is the art" (p.179). Are they talking about the same thing/dynamic or something different?

After reading Nietzsche and Tolstoy, I feel that they are both expressing similar concepts as both of their philosophies demand that art, especially art of quality, must deviate from the podium of individualism. Nietzsche’s philosophy about “this collapse of principium individuationis,” calls for true art to be in tension between the Apollonian force of individual character and the Dionysian force of chaotic emotions. Tolstoy’s belief that “the stronger the infection the better the art,” calls that in art the emotions of the creator must be shared, become less individualized, among those who experience the art. In both theories, art digresses from the individual who creates it to a sense of communal emotions or feelings.

Nietzsche conveys his thoughts about “this collapse of principium individuationis,” in which he composes two separate forces—Apollonian and Dioysian. Apollonian force was named after Apollo, the Greek God of Sun who represented luminosity and clearness. In Nietzsche’s account, Apollonian force served to define individualism, individual thought, and individual character. Whereas Dioysian force was named after Dionysus, the Greek God of wine, who represented pleasure and drunkenness. Dioysian force served to define illogical, chaotic emotions and feelings.

In critiquing art, Nietzsche believed that authentic art must contain a conflict between the Apollonian and Dioysian forces in that the clear individualism behind each piece must be convoluted with drunkenness emotion.

Tolstoy had a similar perception of art in that, to qualify as art, the piece must expand beyond the individual and contain the three components of (1) evoking the individual feeling in others, (2) have clearness about that feeling, and (3) have sincerity amongst it. To be considered art, individualism must be diluted as each art piece becomes less unique as more people experience the feeling that the artist experienced while creating it. Tolstoy believed, “to evoke in oneself a feeling one has once experienced, and having evoked it in oneself then by means of movements, lines, colors, sounds, or forms expressed in words, so to transmit, that feeling, that others experience the same feeling—this is the activity of art.” It is in such a sense that both Tolstoy and Nietzsche have similar views when it comes to qualifying art. In the perspectives of both men, art cannot be purely individualistic in nature.

Above Image: Image of Tolstoy

“Faking It”

Discuss the part of Faking It? that we watched - and provide a prediction: Will Paul manage to fool the experts? ..."fool"!? Why would he be a fake?

In the portion of the show “Faking It” that we saw in class, Paul O’hare, a house painter, was quickly transformed into a “fake” contemporary artist in an attempt to trick the art world of the United Kingdom. During his transformation, he had access to professional artists who taught and coached him. He took art classes in which he learned how to draw and paint using a variety of techniques. He was mentored how to understand art and speak its language. He even had professional critics come to educate him as to how art is critiqued and, as if that weren’t enough, he received a complete makeover so he could look the part of an artist.

I found the title of the show to be ironic. As Paul received more and more coaching from professionals, he became less of a fake. Instead of acting as a “fake” artist, the show does a better job converting him into a real artist (not a good artist, but a real artist nonetheless). Paul illustrated some key characteristics of professional artists in my opinion. First, he took his transformation seriously. Paul spent as much time as he could in the studio improving his artistic abilities. Second, his art was made with emotion and had profound meaning to him as he used it to express his disabilities from when he was a child. Third, Paul quickly learned to appreciate the art around him.

After listening to the professional critic’s evaluation of Paul’s artwork and demeanor, I do not believe he will manage to trick the experts. Paul’s art lacks depth that experienced artists typically capture and his novice knowledge of art is evident when he is in conversation. While I do not think he will fool the experts, I do believe Paul will have become a “real” artist by the end of the show. Paul’s inexperience and innocence in the art world doesn’t disable him from being able to produce meaningful art.

"That Old Master? It's Down at the Pawnshop"

Read the article: "That Old Master? It's Down at the Pawnshop" and discuss it's emphasis of the commercial aspect of art in relation to the Kinkade-video.

Both “That Old Master? It’s Down at the Pawnshop” article and the Thomas Kinkade 60 Minutes video diverted attention to the commercial aspect of art and how it can be financially profitable. Objectively speaking, the Art Capital Group, mentioned in article, is able to profit from art by commercially selling the art that they acquire from art owners who default on the loans that the company provides and Thomas Kinkade is able to profit from art by commercially selling mass productions of his original pieces.

From a subjective point of view, I felt the actions of the Art Capital Group and Kinkade were deceitful and served as a disservice to art. In reading the article, I didn’t perceive the Art Capital Group as an honorable loan organization for owners of fine art as I felt their practices lacked legitimacy and transparency. In my eyes the Art Capital Group provides extraordinary loans at excessive interest rates to financially troubled art owners in ill faith. Unlike most loan organizations, the Art Capital Group provides loans hoping that their clients, who have signed the rights to their fine art as collateral, will default on their loans. When clients default on their loans, the Art Capital Group seizes their fine art and places it up for sale. In that sense the article was correct in treating the Art Capital Group as little more than a glorified pawn shop.

In the case of Thomas Kinkade, his organization is deceitful in an entirely different aspect. The video segment made it apparent that Kinkade maximizes his profit by providing the illusion that his art is original and unique, despite that fact that his art is mass produced and, if it does have the pleasure of touching an actual paint brush, it is often at the end of an intern artist’s hand. Kinkade’s art lacks personal touch and meaning.

In my opinion the Art Capital Group and Kinkade’s organization financially exploit art by commercializing it. Both organizations value the art they handle and sell for solely monetary purposes, each lacking all appreciation for value associated with meaning derived from each piece. The Art Capital Group acts as a disservice to art by treating it as merely a commodity that can be used to achieve financial success. Kinkade’s organization acts as a disservice to art by stripping it of its unique properties. The commercially distasteful practices of each company demean the intrinsic value of art, condensing the beauty of each to piece to a dollar amount.

Image Above: One of Kinkade’s Pieces

“Can”did Awareness

“Can”did Awareness
“Chris Jordan Running the Numbers” Review

In examining American society, it is evident that we are a nation of consumers. So often, the public is only made aware of the consequences associated with our consumption through lengthy speeches made to politicians, wordy news publications, and dried out television segments. In my opinion, such avenues are fruitless in promoting consumption awareness and change, as they are uninteresting and difficult to conceptualize. Only the media pieces that vividly illustrate the enormity of the issue successfully promote awareness and initiate change. One such example is the anti-smoking campaign that has swept the country, in which disturbing images of the health effects caused by smoking are shown along with creative anti-smoking messages that are clear, concise, and to-the-point. The anti-smoking campaign has been successful in reducing the number of smokers, while initiatives pertaining to reducing our dependency on gasoline at an individual level have been slow to ignite.

During my visit to the WSU art museum, it was clear that Chris Jordan, an ex-lawyer turned professional photographer, realizes the importance of the visual aspect of human comprehension. As an artist, Chris Jordan fuses together photographs of consumer products to create a piece of art that demonstrates the sheer scale of American consumerism. Each image portrays a vast quantity of consumer items – two million plastic bottles, one hundred million toothpicks, 2.3 million folded prison uniforms – and includes a statistic to put the quantity in perspective. Jordan, in his website, conveys that society overlooks our enormous levels of consumption because we are unable to wrap our heads around the numbers. By providing a visual representation, Jordan, has made the statistics comprehendible while subtly imposing his personal critique on imperative social issues that revolve around environmental waste, criminal justice, drug abuse, and product consumption.

I was particularly interested in three of Chris Jordan’s pieces when I was viewing his exhibit: Plastic Bottles (2007), Skull with Cigarettes (2008), and Cans Seurat (2007). The element that struck me most about these photographs was the clever additions Jordan made to each piece to direct the viewer into a particular reaction. In my opinion, Jordan predisposes his photographs to ignite a reaction from the viewer that is consistent with his views on consumerism.

In Plastic Bottles (2007), Jordan effectively encouraged a negative reaction from the viewer by making the shocking terrain appear to travel back as far as the eye can see. He achieved this by making the bottles near the front of the photo appear large and detailed, while the bottles in the back of the photo diminish in size making the landscape appear never ending. While Jordan could have illustrated the statistic by making the bottles appear flat, I believed he created the photo as he did with the intention of evoking a negative reaction towards America’s consumption of canned beverages. I speak from personal experience as my initial reaction, after viewing the photo, towards American consumerism was one of waste and excess.

I appreciated how Jordan was able to vividly associate death with cigarette consumption by arranging cigarette packs to illustrate a skull in Skull with Cigarettes (2008). He effectively did this while staying consistent to his style of art as the photograph depicted 200,000 packs of cigarettes, equal to the number of Americans who die from cigarette smoking every six months. Again, he could have just illustrated the stacked packs of cigarettes, but instead he directed the viewer into a particular response by creating a broader image of a skull. I believe he created this photograph to make viewers aware of the ultimate consequence that arises from American cigarette consumption.

I was intrigued by the angle Jordan took in Cans Seurat (2007). The majority of photographs I saw during my tour created by Jordan appeared to condemn American consumerism. In Cans Seurat (2007), it is as if Jordan beautifies and applauds the number of aluminum cans used by Americans every 30 seconds by assembling 106,000 aluminum cans into an eye pleasing park scene. The photograph reveals a delicate contrast between natural scenery and processed metal. When I initially viewed it I assumed the statistic would revolve around the quantity of cans American’s recycle every hour, but, to my dismay, it was the quantity of cans Americans use every 30 seconds. I believe Jordan altered the photograph, making it visually similar to one of Georges-Pierre Seurat’s pieces, to draw the attention to the piece.

I enjoy the passion and creativity of Jordan’s art work. He chooses to focus on real consumerism issues that are affecting a real society. In my opinion, while I support his work and the awareness he is seeking to promote, I believe it will have little difference in the grand scheme of things. In accurately illustrating the enormity of an array of consumerism issues, Jordan belittles the individual contribution. In my opinion, his pieces enabled me to justify the number of plastic airplane cups I use because it doesn’t significantly increase or decrease the total number used Americans every year. Additionally, Jordan’s statistics become dated rapidly—further supporting the notion that his work will have little influence on American consumerism.

In Jordan’s defense, I don’t think he is using his art to initiate change in the way his viewers consume. I believe Jordan’s goal, as an artist, is to promote awareness pertaining to American consumerism issues and to get each individual thinking about how he/she contribute to each consumerism issue.

Photo Above: Skull with Cigarettes (2008) by Chris Jordan

Kant’s Belief That Taste is Aesthetical

Kant writes: "If we judge objects merely according to concepts, then all representation of beauty is lost." (p. 106).

What (on earth) does he mean? Which other Kant-concept/idea could you connect this statement to? Give it your best shot in a not too long blog.

Kant is reinforcing his position that the judgment of taste is aesthetical through his statement, “if we judge objects merely according to concepts, then all representation of beauty is lost.” Kant believes that the beauty of art is not distinguished by a judgment of cognitive understanding for an object, but instead by aesthetical meaning. I completely agree with Kant, for if society were to strictly critique art on a cognitive level then each piece of art would merely have a title and become a definition rather than a form that is sentimental and beautiful.

In judging objects according to only concepts, Chris Jordan’s photograph illustrating 2.3 million folded prison uniforms would be exactly as it is represented by the text statistic. The piece would signify the exact same thing to everyone in society because of the objective nature by which it was judged and it would fail to promote awareness about criminal justice by evoking emotion.

We know that Kant’s position holds valid to society today because art pieces have different meanings to different people. Kant’s thought that the determining judgment of art is subjective is further supported by the cliché that “the beauty of art lies within the eyes of the beholder.”

I feel that Kant’s belief regarding the judgment of taste connects to elements of Hume’s idea pertaining to “the standard of taste.” Hume expressed that “beauty is no quality in things themselves: It exists merely in the mind which contemplates them; and each mind perceives a different beauty.” Through his statements, Hume essentially communicated if we judge objects merely according to concepts, then all representation of beauty is lost because beauty results from individual meaning and sentiment. It is evident that both Kant and Hume agree that the judgment of taste is aesthetical and that beauty is derived by subjective means.

Image Above:
Immanuel Kant (1724 – 1804)
www.stumpertenrod.de/mf_08_immanuel_kant.jpg

David Hume Review on Aspects of “On the Standard of Taste”

After reading the section on David Hume (p. 78-92) discuss your relationship to the notion of “taste” (e.g. is either, both, or none of the provided two paintings tasteful).

In the section on David Hume, pertaining to “the standard of taste”, Hume expressed that “beauty is no quality in things themselves: It exists merely in the mind which contemplates them; and each mind perceives a different beauty.” Hume’s perspective on beauty reinforces the cliché that beauty lies in the eye of the beholder.

I was intrigued by the method in which Hume conveyed the impossibility of creating a standard of taste among men, as an individual’s preferences are highly influenced by sentiment and factors related to the delicacy of the imagination, personal prejudices, experience derived from practice, and formed comparisons. I agree with Hume in that all sentiment is right, or rather no sentiment is wrong, and due to the diversity of opinion among humans it creates a situation where it is impossible to define real beauty or deformity.

Although Hume is unable to define absolute beauty and absolute deformity, he effectively communicates the parameters for which what is real can be considered tasteful. He expresses that taste is entirely based on personal palette as “to seek real beauty, or real deformity, is as fruitless an enquiry, as to pretend to ascertain the real sweet or real bitter.”

In referencing Hume’s philosophy on taste, I find neither of the paintings to be tasteful on many levels. First, coming from an entirely objective stance with minimal prejudices, I find deformities or inferior beauty in both the paintings. The painting of the monkey holding a flower, in my opinion, combines the superior beauty of a flower with the inferior beauty of monkey as I see monkeys to be a substandard of human beauty. In no logical circumstance can an individual obtain anything more than mediocrity from a mixture of greatness and commonness.

The portrait of the man is also not tasteful. There is no beauty associated with the painting that registers with my palette. I am unable to relate to the man’s appearance, style of dress, and facial expression. I find the painting similar to the story mentioned about the kinsmen who pronounced the King’s wine to be satisfactory if it weren’t for the hint of leather taste or the distinguishable iron taste left from the key with a leathern thong in the hogshead. The painting, at a fundamental level, illustrates the sweet beauty of a human, but takes a sour turn with the apparent displeasing characteristics in it.

"Paradigms and Purposes" Review on the Perspective of “Versailles and Kant”

Choose one perspective from Freeman’s Chapter 2, “Paradigms and Purposes,” that particularly stands out to you and discuss it.

After reading Chapter 2, “Paradigm and Purposes,” I decided to focus on the perspective proposed by Kant, regarding the gardens of Versailles, because I felt his attitude towards gardens and art was intriguing. Kant classified gardens as a form of art in that,

“[L]andscape gardening… consists in no more than decking out the ground with the same manifold variety (grasses, flowers, shrubs, and trees, and even water, hills, and dales) as that with which nature presents it to our view, only arranged differently and in obedience to certain ideas.”

I believe Kant’s characterization and criteria of art may have had an influence in the now popular definition that art is a thoughtful rearrangement of elements. Under such a definition, a garden undoubtedly qualifies as art because it is a combination of naturally found items strategically placed by the gardener.

Kant admits that, “it seems strange that landscape gardening may be regarded as a kind of painting,” but after giving the statement some thought, I noticed remarkable similarities between a gardener creating a garden and a painter creating a painting. Despite the fact that each artist is using a different palette, the gardener using a palette of plants and the painter using a palette of colored paints, both are thoughtfully arranging their materials in a way to evoke an emotion or convey meaning.

In my experience, gardens are overlooked as a form of art because they don’t fit the social norm for what we, as a society, perceive as art. One can’t fit a garden the size of the garden of Versailles in a museum, and one is unable to capture its continuously changing aesthetics in a photograph that freezes time. The text conveyed that gardens were not perceived by Kant to be one of the highest forms of art. I disagree with Kant’s viewpoint as gardens, with the exception of animals and humans, are the only other form of “living” art. I refer to gardens as “living” because every garden continuously evolves and progresses with age. The artist is only able to manipulate a garden, as the final masterpiece is ultimately designed with the cooperation of another power regardless if you consider that power to be God, Mother Nature, or the disposition of life in itself. In that sense gardens qualify as a higher form of art and lead me to agree with Horace Walpole’s assessment that gardening is along with poetry and painting as the “three sisters or graces”.

Image Above: Gardens of Versailles

“The Natural History of Art” Review

Is our DNA “a sort of ghostly puppet master” (96) determining our aesthetical preferences?

I believe there is partial truth in the statement that DNA is “a sort of ghostly puppet master” in determining our aesthetical preferences. It seems both probable and reasonable that humans, to a degree, are predisposed to have certain preferences. The philosophy that our idiosyncratic tastes may have a biological basis is conveyed quite persuasively through Conniff’s explanation, pertaining to survival, of why humans prefer habits rich with water, large trees, open space, and distance views.

Additionally, in my opinion, art is uninhibited in that it isn’t only visual. Sounds, by avenue of music, and culinary arts, serving as a corridor to taste, can be forms of art so long as each stimulates a sense or evokes

an emotion. The notion that humans, without conditioning, are allured by smooth sounds of nature and are fond of the sweet taste of sugar further suggest that genetics plays a role in determining instinctive preferences.

While Conniff made convincing arguments that our aesthetical preferences are depicted by our genes, I believe that the environment also plays an instrumental role. In the struggle between nature and nurture, nurture must play an influential role in our preferences as it most appropriately explains the vast amount of variability among art that humans are fond of. Genetics at best provides a foundation for our unconscious preferences, while, consciously, our preferences are defined by experiences, environmental conditioning, and social norms. If biological components were the primary determinant of our preferences then it would seem likely that my three brothers and I would all be attracted to the same types of art, but in reality we each enjoy dissimilar music, wear different clothing, are pursuing unique career paths, and participate in different extracurricular activities. Based on my personal observations, the variation in preferences and individuality we seem among humans can’t be explained without a nurture aspect being factored into the notion that nature governs our preferences.

To read article, visit https://notes.utk.edu/bio/greenberg.nsf/0/f60081ef35fba95c85256e6e006a2a77.

Image Above: Joan Miro "In Woman and Bird in the Moonlight" (1949)