List of all the video's: August 26 Introduction and In-class lecture 1. Modern Contexts: Introducing the Avant-Garde 2. The Canvas as an Arena: Jackson Pollock September 2 In-class lecture 1. The (Spiritual) Crisis of Abstract Expressionism: Mark Rothko 2. Clement Greenberg and Post-Painterly Abstraction September 16 In-class lecture 1. The Fully Present Object: the Minimalist Project 2. Duchamp’s Legacy: Robert Rauschenberg and John Cage September 23 In-class lecture 1. Working in the Gap Between Art and Life: Robert Rauschenberg and Jasper Johns 2. Art in an Age of Mass-Media: Andy Warhol September 30 In-class lecture 1. Conceptual Art: New Strategies for Meaning 2. Postmodern Strategies: Mixed Messages and Undecidability October 14 In-class lecture 1. Working in the Expanded Field, part 1: Site Construction 2. Working in the Expanded Field, part 2: Marked Sites November 4 In-class lecture 1. Working in the Expanded Field, part 2: Axiomatic Structures 2. Contemporary Liturgies: Performance Art and Embodied Belief November 11 In-class lecture 1. Bodies of Knowledge: Performance Art and Social Space 2. Contemporary Laments: An Update on the Human Condition December 2 In-class Lecture 1. Mapping the Contemporary: What is going on Today?, part 1 2. Mapping the Contemporary: What is going on Today?, part 2
Thank you for sharing this lecture, I listened as I painted my version of a nun who started a hospital in Rome. I went from realism to an abstract expressionist view. I will give this painting to the hospital. I hope the subject matter of the painting will convey an abstract quality to the humanity along with the goodness of the heart.
Regarding the reference to Ishmael in Moby Dick, Anderson initially responds regarding the obsession to hunt the white whale. That would pertain to Captain Ahab. Ishmael is a pilgrim along for the ride observing and recording. Indeed Ishmael laments the role of the artist in Chap 1, para 6: "Here is an artist. He desires to paint you the dreamiest, shadiest, quietest, most enchanting bit of romantic landscape in all the valley of the Saco. What is the chief element he employs?" Ending the paragraph with "It is the image of the ungraspable phantom of life; and this is the key to it all."
I’m sorry, but like so many people that talk about art, to me it just seems like they’re just filling time. As an artist, surely you just FEEL it. It’s personal. Some pictures transmit feelings of differing emotions. They are not right or wrong. Some Rothco’s pictures work for me, as do some Pollocks’s, but not all of them. If we spend time looking at it long enough, surely any artist can take what they want from from it without anyone waffling on about it for hours? When told to buy the Rosenberg and Greenberg’s very thick book on their commentary of art it was the biggest waste of money. Isn’t it funny how there are artists that actually DO the art, and then there are the commentators, who are obviously frustrated because they can’t do it themselves, because they just have no ideas for themselves.
He is talking about experiences not religion and beliefs and Mark Rothkos art,as well as the art of each artist, is his own religion, created through the whole life process of creation and searching for something greater than ourselves. Searching for the essence. I hope this helps a little bit.
Rothko was born in Latvia, a country of the USSR - Not Russia. USSR and Russia were two different entities like UK and GB and England. Just thought I'd point that out :)
So, here I am in the Tate Modern, in the Rothko's room. One can not see the colors very well, there is very little light in the room. I try to look for that undefined something and yes, two of the pieces displayed troubled me. But then I realize they are wrongly exposed. They are hung with the stripes vertically. Anyway, thank you very much for uploading these videos and sharing such priceless guide to modern art.
You've confused Ishmael with Ahab, which moves the analogy a bit off the mark. Ishmael is a relatively naive young man going to sea to seek adventure. Ahab was the obsessive captain of the ship Ishmael signed onto.
You don't interpret Pollack...you look for all the really cool little people and faces and living creatures inside. They are always hidden, like gnomes and spirit entities...If you see none then your brain is made jelly at the expanse of the works contemplation and you are reduced to the child you've always been. Just Like contemplating a clear , dark night sky. The stars will make you go mad, if your focus be intent enough. Paint is paint. Canvas is canvas. This guy looks like he's enjoying himself, though. Sometimes, feeling good is good enough....Cheers!
As a fellow art historian he gets much "factual" information completely wrong. His exclusions of art and artists is political, as far as I can tell. He also suppresses so much of the sexuality and gender performance in and around the work. With AbEx his lecture is completely disappointing. Again, I say this as an art historian with a PhD from UCLA
Awful lecture! Lecturing on critics opinions??? Not prepared to answer questions or just say you don't know! Geez! Borrrringggg! Students deserve an a just for staying awake! This is painful!
He keeps calling Rothko powerful. To me he is the ultimate in insipidness. Move along, nothing to see here. Even a stop sign holds more interest. Does a single chord qualify as a song? To me the answer is no. Rothko is why modern art is a scam. If I want fuzzy blocks of color, I want a blanket, not a painting. I see in Rothko a refusal to enter into the struggle against the abyss. Instead, he passively allows it to loom over his life and art, while he waits for it to swallow him, gnaw on his bones and digest him. I see more merit in Pollock. Despite the apparent spontaneity and randomness, Pollock still maintains remarkable control over the entire canvas in its uniformity of pattern and coloration. Anyone who's ever splashed paint knows that you don't get uniformly thin threads of color without some deliberateness. Instead you get one or more blobs from which emanates sprays and splatters and drips. Pollock is completely directionless. He flails away in all directions against a foe he knows is out there somewhere, but he keeps fighting to the end nevertheless. When one challenges "the abyss" as Rothko and Pollock do, there's always the danger that the abyss will win and swallow you. Pollock is a fly buzzing around the entrance to the black hole until he gets sucked in eventually. Rothko is simply a foot soldier trudging forward relentlessly and blindly over the edge, along with the rest of his army of lemmings. Perhaps that's why he prefers "we" to "I".
![[ARTS 315] Postmodern Strategies: The Canvas as an Arena: Jackson Pollock - Jon Anderson](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/k7fodAy0jbU/mqdefault.jpg)
![[ARTS 315] Postmodern Strategies: The Canvas as an Arena: Jackson Pollock - Jon Anderson](/img/tr.png)
![[ARTS 315] What's Going on Today, part 1 - Jon Anderson](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/35mKCj_9TRQ/mqdefault.jpg)
![[ARTS 315] Clement Greenberg and Post-Painterly Abstraction - Jon Anderson](/img/n.gif)
The parallels drawn to music were inventive and exciting , thanks for sharing this lecture , great help for my thesis.
List of all the video's:
August 26
Introduction and In-class lecture
1. Modern Contexts: Introducing the Avant-Garde
2. The Canvas as an Arena: Jackson Pollock
September 2 In-class lecture
1. The (Spiritual) Crisis of Abstract Expressionism: Mark Rothko
2. Clement Greenberg and Post-Painterly Abstraction
September 16 In-class lecture
1. The Fully Present Object: the Minimalist Project
2. Duchamp’s Legacy: Robert Rauschenberg and John Cage
September 23 In-class lecture
1. Working in the Gap Between Art and Life: Robert Rauschenberg and Jasper Johns
2. Art in an Age of Mass-Media: Andy Warhol
September 30 In-class lecture
1. Conceptual Art: New Strategies for Meaning
2. Postmodern Strategies: Mixed Messages and Undecidability
October 14 In-class lecture
1. Working in the Expanded Field, part 1: Site Construction
2. Working in the Expanded Field, part 2: Marked Sites
November 4 In-class lecture
1. Working in the Expanded Field, part 2: Axiomatic Structures
2. Contemporary Liturgies: Performance Art and Embodied Belief
November 11 In-class lecture
1. Bodies of Knowledge: Performance Art and Social Space
2. Contemporary Laments: An Update on the Human Condition
December 2 In-class Lecture
1. Mapping the Contemporary: What is going on Today?, part 1
2. Mapping the Contemporary: What is going on Today?, part 2
An artist's consciousness is his own. If another connects to it, then he finds his audience.
Well said.
Thank you for sharing this lecture, I listened as I painted my version of a nun who started a hospital in Rome. I went from realism to an abstract expressionist view. I will give this painting to the hospital. I hope the subject matter of the painting will convey an abstract quality to the humanity along with the goodness of the heart.
Jon Anderson does a good job of discussing the issues of modern art through the works of Jackson Pollock and Mark Rothko.
I teach art in an university, and this professor is doing a good job.
An what university is it you teach art in?
Regarding the reference to Ishmael in Moby Dick, Anderson initially responds regarding the obsession to hunt the white whale. That would pertain to Captain Ahab. Ishmael is a pilgrim along for the ride observing and recording. Indeed Ishmael laments the role of the artist in Chap 1, para 6: "Here is an artist. He desires to paint you the dreamiest, shadiest, quietest, most enchanting bit of romantic landscape in all the valley of the Saco. What is the chief element he employs?" Ending the paragraph with "It is the image of the ungraspable phantom of life; and this is the key to it all."
Exactly.
Good catch. I think you right. It's also worth noting that some of Captain Ahab's obsession does rub off on Ishmael a bit.
I’m sorry, but like so many people that talk about art, to me it just seems like they’re just filling time.
As an artist, surely you just FEEL it. It’s personal. Some pictures transmit feelings of differing emotions. They are not right or wrong. Some Rothco’s pictures work for me, as do some Pollocks’s, but not all of them.
If we spend time looking at it long enough, surely any artist can take what they want from from it without anyone waffling on about it for hours?
When told to buy the Rosenberg and Greenberg’s very thick book on their commentary of art it was the biggest waste of money.
Isn’t it funny how there are artists that actually DO the art, and then there are the commentators, who are obviously frustrated because they can’t do it themselves, because they just have no ideas for themselves.
He is talking about experiences not religion and beliefs and Mark Rothkos art,as well as the art of each artist, is his own religion, created through the whole life process of creation and searching for something greater than ourselves. Searching for the essence. I hope this helps a little bit.
this was truly amazing, thank you
mark rothko was an atheist, the stuff this guy was saying at the end was misleading
Please upload subtitles , none of the questions asked by students are audible. Thanks
Rothko was born in Latvia, a country of the USSR - Not Russia. USSR and Russia were two different entities like UK and GB and England. Just thought I'd point that out :)
He was born in 1903, prior to USSR. Latvia was part of the Russian empire then.
So, here I am in the Tate Modern, in the Rothko's room. One can not see the colors very well, there is very little light in the room. I try to look for that undefined something and yes, two of the pieces displayed troubled me. But then I realize they are wrongly exposed. They are hung with the stripes vertically. Anyway, thank you very much for uploading these videos and sharing such priceless guide to modern art.
I hope they fixed it and hung it the right way
You've confused Ishmael with Ahab, which moves the analogy a bit off the mark. Ishmael is a relatively naive young man going to sea to seek adventure. Ahab was the obsessive captain of the ship Ishmael signed onto.
This guy gets it, and that’s coming from a Medici
You don't interpret Pollack...you look for all the really cool little people and faces and living creatures inside. They are always hidden, like gnomes and spirit entities...If you see none then your brain is made jelly at the expanse of the works contemplation and you are reduced to the child you've always been. Just Like contemplating a clear , dark night sky. The stars will make you go mad, if your focus be intent enough. Paint is paint. Canvas is canvas. This guy looks like he's enjoying himself, though. Sometimes, feeling good is good enough....Cheers!
actually finding representative shapes /objects in an abstract painting is one of the simplest and most facile ways to read it
PollOck
Why laugh about World war 1 and 2?
As a fellow art historian he gets much "factual" information completely wrong. His exclusions of art and artists is political, as far as I can tell. He also suppresses so much of the sexuality and gender performance in and around the work. With AbEx his lecture is completely disappointing. Again, I say this as an art historian with a PhD from UCLA
Awful lecture! Lecturing on critics opinions??? Not prepared to answer questions or just say you don't know! Geez! Borrrringggg! Students deserve an a just for staying awake! This is painful!
He keeps calling Rothko powerful. To me he is the ultimate in insipidness. Move along, nothing to see here. Even a stop sign holds more interest. Does a single chord qualify as a song? To me the answer is no. Rothko is why modern art is a scam. If I want fuzzy blocks of color, I want a blanket, not a painting. I see in Rothko a refusal to enter into the struggle against the abyss. Instead, he passively allows it to loom over his life and art, while he waits for it to swallow him, gnaw on his bones and digest him.
I see more merit in Pollock. Despite the apparent spontaneity and randomness, Pollock still maintains remarkable control over the entire canvas in its uniformity of pattern and coloration. Anyone who's ever splashed paint knows that you don't get uniformly thin threads of color without some deliberateness. Instead you get one or more blobs from which emanates sprays and splatters and drips. Pollock is completely directionless. He flails away in all directions against a foe he knows is out there somewhere, but he keeps fighting to the end nevertheless.
When one challenges "the abyss" as Rothko and Pollock do, there's always the danger that the abyss will win and swallow you. Pollock is a fly buzzing around the entrance to the black hole until he gets sucked in eventually. Rothko is simply a foot soldier trudging forward relentlessly and blindly over the edge, along with the rest of his army of lemmings. Perhaps that's why he prefers "we" to "I".
Imagine Rothko reading this ! What a sad day for him
A single chord most definitely qualifies as a song. In fact, a single note does.