Practical 3

Posted: February 13, 2014 | Author: | Filed under: Year 2 - Term 2 - Art and the Conscious Mind | Tags: , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Earlier today was the last practical session for ‘Art and the Conscious mind’. This was lead by PHD student Craig Thomas who is exploring the relationships between people in different environments. He has been creating some installation art that disorients the participants and sometimes blurs the lines between the subject and object.

We looked at one of Craig Thomas’ installations in particular this session as it was set up in my University. This piece was called ‘Labyrinth’ and as the name suggests, it was a maze! It was made up of a swirling piece of white netting that hung from the ceiling creating a path in which you could walk around and horizontal lights that moved upwards and downwards projected onto it. I found the experience of walking around the maze very surreal. All of my senses were muddled up and all I could really see were the bright lights. There was also a quiet buzzing noise in the background (possibly from the projector) which, in combination with the lights made the experience of walking around seem unfamiliar. It made me feel isolated even though I knew there were other people around me. Whilst walking around this maze I could just see shadows of people. Everyone was also very silent which added to this surreal experience. My sense of direction was also distorted because of the movements of the striped lights. The people that I could see often looked as if they were moving up and down themselves. It looked as if they were all being abducted by aliens! Overall this was quite a hypnotic experience. I felt very relaxed after walking out of the maze. I also felt slightly nauseous! I have attached some still images from the video that I made whilst walking around the net maze as I could not upload the video 😦 These images are not as effective in explaining the experience as the actual video but hopefully they do give a sense of confusion!

Pieces of art such as this one confuses out consciousness and make us more aware of realising that we are seeing. In our minds we all have memories of the world and so we are used to most things that happen. Because of this we often do not think about what we are looking at. In situations where we are unable to identify what is going on, we often make up explanations. When I was walking around in the maze my consciousness of myself seeing was heightened as it was a disorienting situation.

Painting of ‘falling’ dream

Posted: February 10, 2014 | Author: | Filed under: Year 2 - Term 2 - Art and the Conscious Mind | Tags: , , | Leave a comment

After a practical session a few weeks ago based on communicating the ‘unseen’ through art, I decided to paint a recurring ‘falling’ dream that I had when I was younger. This is a very common dream but I remember as a child being able to force this dream to happen. Every time I dreamt that I was kneeling down on my staircase whilst holding onto the banister I was able to do this. I always liked this dream!

In my painting I have painted what I can remember of this dream. I have also added some abstracted mark-making on top to resemble the movement in my dream. These marks were inspired by some paintings that I did last week of what I could see with my eyes closed.

Practical 3

Posted: January 31, 2014 | Author: | Filed under: Year 2 - Term 2 - Art and the Conscious Mind | Tags: , , | Leave a comment

Yesterday was the third practical session for ‘Art and the Conscious Mind’. It was lead by PHD student Alise Piebalga who uses dance and body movement to produce performance pieces of art. She began by describing how she felt when on the flying trapeze. Alise admitted to being fairly new to this and so her experiences were often completely different to more confident performers. She described that at the start when she is standing on the edge of the platform ready to jump she is completely aware of what is going on and this continues through the swing. However, when she is momentarily suspended in mid-air waiting for someone to catch her, her awareness is completely altered. Her sense of time is distorted and all sound is mute. Alise gave this example so that we could think about our own consciousness. This relates back to the seminar earlier this week when we were discussing how many minds we have and the different states of mind that we can be in.

Alise Piebalga’s art focuses on discontinuity in experiences and through performance art she created environments where others can experience what she experienced. She uses cameras to capture one performance form various angles and then presents these films simultaneously, showing one movement in many ways.

The practical part of this session was performance based. We all split up into groups of four and paired up within these groups. Our first task was to mirror each others movements. I guess this was so that we could both experience the same thing simultaneously. Whilst doing this the other pair made notes about what they were witnessing. They had to focus on the characteristics and dynamics of the body movements, the shapes made and the space used as body movement shapes our perception of the world.

After thinking about the previous task, we then involved cameras in our small performance pieces. We were asked to use the cameras inventively so that they capture the movements from unique viewpoints. We soon abandoned the ‘mirror’ idea as it was not really working for us and decided to all sit in a circle and made continuous hand movements which swirled in together and back out again. We filmed this from underneath which captured an interesting perspective on this movement.

We also made another experimental piece which involved string. Three of us started off by wrapping a part of the string around our wrists whilst the other filmed. All three of us then proceeded to wrap more and more string around our wrists and hands until eventually we could no longer continue. On camera we captured close-ups of the string being pulled and our hands being bound together. Parts of the film were quite successful while others were quite disorienting as the camera spun too quickly! Either way it was interesting thinking about how things can be perceived from different viewpoints and can be communicated to others through the use of film.

 

I am still waiting for images to be sent to me..hopefully I will get them soon 🙂

Seminar 2

Posted: January 21, 2014 | Author: | Filed under: Contextualisation, Year 2 - Term 2 - Art and the Conscious Mind | Tags: , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Today’s seminar was based on deciphering where the conscious mind is located, something which was discussed last week, and also where an object ends.

We started this seminar by looking at the painting “Woman in Blue reading a letter” by Vermeer. We were then asked where the letter was. At first most of us thought that the letter was in the woman’s hands as it seemed the obvious answer, but after different ideas were proposed, such as the letter being in the woman’s mind, we all began to question our understanding of consciousness.

To help us come to our own conclusions about where the letter was we were introduced to two theories; Internalism and Externalism. Firstly, we discussed Internalism where the mind exists is in the brain. The philosopher William James was a supporter of this theory. He said that this is the obvious truth and so we should just accept it.

Externalism is the opposite of Internalism. It is the theory that the mind is not in the brain but somewhere else. This other place is unknown! The more I think about this concept the more I think it is plausible. There are many cases of people suffering from Hydrocephalus where they are missing great amounts of their brain, but they are completely ‘normal’. It is fascinating that you do not need the majority of you brain in order to live. This piece of information begs us to challenge the conventional concept that your mind is located inside your brain.

For something to be internal, however there has to be something encasing it, separating it from the external world. This seemed like a logical and simple explanation at first, but when we started to examine what a ‘boundary’ actually is, it became more confusing and there seemed to be no solution. ‘Boundaries’ were spoken about a lot during this seminar. The concept of where an objects ends and another one begins was very interesting as well as debatable. Leonardo Da Vinci himself nicknamed boundaries as ‘invisible thicknesses’. After thinking about this myself I completely agree. Are there really any boundaries? An example of a magnified tooth was used in the seminar today. Once magnified, the solidness of a tooth gets broken down until we are just left with atoms and even they are made from nothing! If atoms are made from nothing then what is everything that exists made up of?

Two types of boundaries were mentioned in today’s seminar. One type named ‘Fiat’ and the other ‘Bona Fide’. Fiat, being an imaginary boundary that has been given to the world by convention. This can be seen throughout the world where one Country ends and another one starts. These boundaries exist in our mind as there are no physical signs to suggest them. Bona Fide boundaries on the other hand are marked by physical signs. A good example was used in this seminar of the boundaries between the sea and the land. Although we can easily imagine a line between the two, it becomes more complicated when we think of the shore on the beach. There is no obvious distinction between the two. It is very unclear as to where the boundary actually is and if there is one then who it belongs to. Does it belong to both? If this is the case them where is the boundary between the object and the initial boundary? This is very complicated to visualize. All I see when I try to are endless boundaries, sort of like contour lines! This is all very interesting to learn about as there is a lot to think about. Even now as I am writing this I am considering my place in this world! Very deep stuff!

Last week we touched on Quantum Physics being the smallest measurable form of reality. This is a very indeterminate subject as when you try to measure an atom (not that I have ever tried to myself) you apparently force it into a shape and therefore alter reality. Accurately measuring an atom is something that fascinated Einstein. He came up with an experiment, although I am told that he was not alive long enough to see it being executed, in which you could split a pair of atoms and by measuring the one you would be able to make a reasonable estimate for the other one depending on its speed. I do not know all of the ins and outs of this but it was discovered that the ‘twin’ atom reacted in exactly the same way as the other one. This was such a revelation as up until that point, particles were thought to behave predictably. This experiment showed the world that everything is connected in the universe. Even if twin atoms are on the opposite ends of the universe to each other, they will be acting the same! It is strange to think that you could be connected to something so distant, or close I suppose. You could be connected to the person sitting right next to you! This leads to the big question of where we actually are and where we actually end.

Regarding these questions there are many different answers. When you make a phone call to someone, where are you then? A part of you has been transported to another place. We have an extended existence in a way. This can also be seen through heat detectors and our individual scent.

Referring back to the painting “Woman in Blue reading a letter” the letter could be in various places. The realist view suggests that there are two letters, the one in her hands and the one projected into her mind. The Extentionist view is that the woman is seeing the sun as the light is bouncing off the letter. Also if considering this viewpoint then the letter is part of the person who wrote it and the person has become part of her.

Another painting we discussed was Velázquez’s “Las Meninas”. This painting is considered to be one of the best in the world as it heightens your consciousness and forces you into the act of perception. Where are we seeing this painting from? I think that it is probable that the artist painted what he saw in a mirror and what we see in the small mirror in the background is the painting that he is painting on the canvas. Again, there is much debate about this.

Seminar 1

Posted: January 15, 2014 | Author: | Filed under: Contextualisation, Year 2 - Term 2 - Art and the Conscious Mind | Tags: , , | Leave a comment

Yesterday we had our first Seminar for the project “Art and the Conscious mind” and it was very interesting just as I had anticipated. This project focuses on the links between the nature of art and the human mind. It questions our understanding of consciousness and how consciousness ‘brings the world into being for us’. It was interesting to learn that there is no proven theory as to what consciousness actually is and as to why we have it. The modern-day Philosopher David Chalmers came up with the ‘hard problem’ in reaction to this very question. Why is it that we have consciousness? Why do we need consciousness? The ‘hard problem’ is yet to be answered. There have been many theories that have attempted to answer this problem. Many were spoken about in this seminar. I found the ‘Mysterianism’ theory quite interesting. This dealt with the idea that understanding consciousness is something that humans will never be able to achieve. The example of trying to explain the rules of Football to a cat was used to illustrate this point!

The next part of this seminar looked at visual consciousness. It is strange to think that the human mind sometimes sees things that are not there; for example the Necker Cube. Our brain forces us to see things as I suppose we do not like it when things are unrecognisable. The example of Visual form Agnosia, a condition where you cannot recognise objects, was used to demonstrate that recognition and perceptual processes are separate. The Mathematician George Spencer says that if you have a world where nothing is severed then you have nothing. We create reality by separation.

Visual Indeterminacy is something that my Professor, Robert Pepperell is deeply interested in and his artistic practice focuses on this. He creates art where there could possibly be objects, but ultimately there are none. As I mentioned previously, we do not like it when we cannot recognise objects. We are a very inquisitive and always try to find things when uncertain. His paintings are not patterns however, as generally we do not look for things within them. In this seminar it was said that Kandinsky had a revelation whilst looking at the Monet painting “Grainstack”. At first he did not have a clue as to what the brown shape was. His revelation was that you don’t have to recognise an object in order to have an emotional connection to it. We can see this in music and poetry also.