Drawing Post #2: Fun Writing Time at the PMA!

I had a difficult time choosing what to write about for this assignment, but I eventually settled on Nicolaes Maes’ Woman Plucking A Duck. This painting, at first, seems rather unremarkable: it is only slightly larger than one square foot, the color scheme is generally subdued and without a whole lot of contrast, and the subject of the painting is an innocuous genre scene. It is absolutely a well-executed painting, but my initial reaction was to assume that Maes was trying to mimic Vermeer. This was not an accurate assumption on my part because Vermeer didn’t create his best-known works until after 1656, which is about the time Maes did this painting. The window on the left as a light source and the quiet household setting are reminiscent of Vermeer, as are the soft value transitions throughout the space that give the lighting an ethereal quality. However, the figure is depicted in very high contrast against the space she inhabits. Maes didn’t approach the figure or the objects in the foreground with the same gentle, almost hazy style as he did the background.
What is truly exciting for me in this painting is the cat. Cats have their own unique personalities, but also species-specific quirks, just like humans, and I enjoy seeing artists’ portrayals of cats. Maes has this cat crouching partially in shadow, creeping up to examine the dead duck and deciding whether or not it is necessary to pounce. His paws are planted flat on the ground with his weight on them, and his ears and eyes are fully attentive. This is how real cats behave when they investigate something new. However, artists don’t always choose to reflect the inner essence of their feline painting subjects. For example, in one of the rooms preceding the one where Maes’ painting is, there is a painting of the Holy Family by Dosso Dossi in which a cat is included in the foreground for symbolism. Dossi’s depiction of the cat isn’t “bad,” it just fits his symbolic purpose better. Dossi’s cat appears very flat because little value has been incorporated into the form, the hind paws don’t seem to actually connect with the floor, the body is rigid and geometric, and the tail is simply a black line. Contrasting these two painters’ depictions of cats highlights the roles they have in art as important symbols or as real, active subjects.
While the light source loosely helps direct our eye through this piece, the placement of warm reds and oranges also draws the viewer down along a path from the top left corner. These reds and oranges are the only colors that stand out against the calm overall darkness in the scene. The colors lead us downwards from the house’s outside wall to focus on the woman plucking the duck, then across the floor where the cat is. Instead of contrasting harshly with the dark, gently rendered background inside the house, these colors enhance the serene quality of the painting because their application is so controlled. The orange of the floor does not dominate the scene, it dissolves into grey shadows at the corners. Because the space of the room seems to recede even more when brighter colors are set against it, the darkness of the space is made extremely compelling and convincing. Highlights on the woman’s head, dress, and on the cat’s face are the most highly contrasting areas, and these may serve a symbolic purpose or simply draw attention to the figures, or just simply be the logical result of the light source. Displaying this painting in a very well-lit room full of other paintings that, in general, are more brightly colored, also creates a contrast that invites the viewer deeper inside the fictional space. If the painting wouldn’t normally stand out, it does now, because it is like a little tunnel out of the gallery into a different place. I think this was a clever way to display this painting and help viewers appreciate its contemplative tone.
The age of this work, and most of the work we see in any museum, is something that always amazes me. Maes’ painting is about 355 years old. While there are absolutely other things in the PMA that are much older, this is still old enough to be mind-boggling. People through the years cared about this painting enough to keep it intact and preserve it for 355 years, and it seems like they did a good job. There are countless works of art that have not been so lucky, which makes those that have survived even more special. We struggle with this in contemporary art and society: the question of how special works really are when there are so many created, and how many people can afford to preserve.

Here are links to the PMA site pages for each painting I talked about:
http://www.philamuseum.org/collections/permanent/49271.html?mulR=1093|3
http://www.philamuseum.org/collections/permanent/101942.html?mulR=30501|1

Computer Post #2: The Met / 7th & Girard Excursion

Misc. Post #2: Theo Jansen

A mind-boggling new favorite artist, much more conceptual and complicated than Louis Wain... Theo Jansen! Youtube and www.strandbeest.com are full of beautiful videos of his work; my links malfunctioned for some reason.

He builds giant kinetic sculptures (they're called "Strandbeests" or "Beach Beasts") that, when the wind blows on them, are totally self-propelled through mechanisms made out of plastic pipes. And according to Theo Jansen's TED Talk on Youtube, some of them have a tube that senses moisture and a grounding mechanism to keep them from blowing away in a storm. In other words, they could survive on their own out on the beaches, which is supposedly Jansen's ultimate goal. I sincerely hope that beaches in the Netherlands are actually filled with these someday. I love them. I was creeped out at first, but all they do is walk around! You can move out of their way, and it's not like you wouldn't notice them coming.
I checked his website, and he has a Physics degree. (Duh.) If someone had showed me years ago that THIS is what one can do with a degree in physics, my life might have turned out differently.

Computer Post #1: UPenn Stuff!

For my first Foundation Computer photo excursion, I went to University City! Sean works at The Blockley every Sunday night, so I started the evening there taking pictures of sound equipment. Usually Sunday night is the open jam, but tonight it was some random band for the Auto Show afterparty. God only knows how/why that ended up being at a college rock bar, but there you go. The one dude was pretty great on guitar and he had a theremin...I unfortunately didn't stick around long enough to hear him play the theremin.
When I got tired of Blockley I ran across the street (in the freezing cold, yuck) to scope out the three or four churches in the area. One is apparently the "Philadelphia Cathedral," which is super cool to me. Cathedrals are such a novelty in the US. I'm not religious, but I've always had a thing for cathedrals and carved stone decorations in general. Wish I could've gone inside... Next time I go on a photo excursion, I'm definitely going during the day and getting as warm as possible. No more cold hands and blurry photos. :[
Other than that, the only last words I have are that UPenn is fancy, and the lighting at the Blockley is not really my favorite. It just makes me feel sort of grotty and lethargic.
Also, there are always a ton of mice on the tracks on the blue line. They're too fast to photograph, but it's nice to see them. I saw one on the way back who was going to town on a bag of BBQ chips, and that made me happy.

Misc. Post #1: Louis Wain

I'm obsessed with Louis Wain. He started out painting cheesy scenes of cats doing human stuff, and eventually he developed schizophrenia. As his condition got worse his cat paintings got crazier and crazier, to the point where they just became complex psychedelic designs.

Drawing Post #1: Quote Response

"The point is, that every piece of art changes your whole perception of the rest of the world for the rest of your life. And it's not a joke! And if it doesn't, then it's not art, it's a commodity." -- Lawrence Weiner responding to a question from Liam Gillick in "Between Artists" p. 20


     I like this idea of defining "art" as something that makes people think and affects them forever, even in the smallest way. This definition might not be viable in every single situation, but it seems like a good start for figuring out whether things are art or just people screwing around. And even people screwing around have the potential to change out perception of the world. So I guess when it really comes down to it, the definitions of "art" nowadays can be totally arbitrary, and the stimulus we experience changes very much from person to person.