No tags yet.
Personal Response: Wolfgang Laib
Wolfgang Laib is not your typical artist. He doesn’t just create art, he creates this ecological experience that transcends the physical world. I was captivated by his process and relationship to nature because he completely submerges himself in this experience by relating to his materials on a spiritual level. Liab allows his environment to fully consume him. I believe this is essential to his process not only because of its authentication to the natural world, but because of the relationship that transpires between the two.
Laib’s pollen art allows nature to break free of it’s utilitarian role. By giving value to all living things Laib shows the importance of nature, and our interaction with it. Most people disregard pollen, associating it with allergies and stinging bee’s. However, Laib takes pollen and presents it in a different light, void of negative connotations. I really appreciate Liab’s attention to his surroundings and the way he gives a voice to nature. I was fascinated to learn about Liabs’s scientific background. His artistic process and work suddenly made perfect sense.
When I delved deeper into his original discipline I became more in sync with his current practice. I do not believe that Liab would be where he is today without his scientific background. There is a direct correlation between his artwork and the six years he spent in medical school.
Both practices take an exorbitant amount of time and discipline, two things that clearly appeal to Laib. I believe medical school conditioned Liab into becoming an artist. While in medical school Liab applied the scientific maxim to the study of life and death. I think this particular concentration lead him into a spiritual realm of unknown possibilities. This is when I believe he became an artist, when he demanded more from life than the limitations we’re all bound by. I did find it curious though that he declared himself an artist only after he passed all his exams to become a doctor.
I wonder why he chose that moment, why wait? Perhaps he was trying to prove to himself that he could do both disciplines, but had the luxury of choosing between the two. Laib shows a respectable amount of humility when it comes to nature and his art. I admire this quality in him because he does not impose his views or opinions onto the viewer. He allows his materials to stand alone and communicate their own meaning to the viewer. This is especially important when it comes to aesthetics. How can critics judge a work of art that was created by nature? This was an important detail about Liab’s work that inspired me, because as the essay states he can neither be blamed or credited for his work.
I think that is what makes his materials so important, they become the critic.
The essay states that the simplicity within Liab’s work takes the viewer away from the chaos of contemporary life. I think anytime you’re using natural materials you do this by creating a sense of harmony within those materials. Laib could have easily gone to a store to get his materials, it would have saved him a lot of time and hard labor. However, I don’t think Liab is concerned with convenience. I think he is making a statement on the effects of consumerism and manufactured materials. His work offers viewers an escape from the restraints of man made items, while making people aware of their surroundings.
Liab believes that we are bigger than ourselves, that we exist as part of a whole. His art definitely reflects this because he never makes the work about himself or anybody else for that matter.I think what I enjoy the most about Liab is his dedication to his work. He makes everything about creating art important, nothing is left out. The process is just as important as the
outcome, some might even argue more so. For me, this type of dedication is what makes him such a successful and exciting artist.
Personal Response: Colors/Pink
This article examines societies relationship to color, specifically the color pink. The writer, David Byrne, investigates its origins by focusing on it’s gender based predilections and medical attributes. I’ve always associated the color pink with little girls, as most North Americans like myself do. But why is there this undeniable attraction to pink? Byrne decides to ask a direct source, his daughter. I found her answers to be particularly thought provoking. The two answers that stuck out to me the most were “because guy’s can’t wear it” and “it’s pretty”.
Our society has been conditioned to believe that pink is emasculating, therefore it is automatically assigned to females. In today’s society I rarely see men wear pink. Aside from the obvious fact that we don’t associate the color with men, there’s a more pressing problem at hand. There simply isn’t a market place for the color. If you walk into any mens apparel store you will not find the color pink on any of it’s shelves. It is hard to tell if men don’t like the color, simply because they are never provided with the opportunity to try or wear it.
I think that society predetermines our likes and dislikes based on sex, gender, and race. It would seem that color just so happens to be a good place to start. The reason why so many of us believe the color pink is pretty is because it is placed on appealing objects or people. Women are the universal spokespeople for all things pretty and exciting. This is where I think our attraction to the color comes from, out of our own attraction for pretty things.
I agree with Byrne’s idea that there isn’t just one definitive answer, but a multitude. For instance I believe that World War II was when the color pink started to rise in popularity for females. It was meant to signify empowerment, and as more women were joining the workforce it’s prominence rose. Instead of the color becoming just a fad they adopted the color long after World War II. After the war women were perceived differently, which is why it was appropriate for the change in views which ultimately changed they way we look at color.
Additionally, Byrne suggests that the change in color also occurred when the Nazis used pink triangles during the war to identify homosexuals. I don’t believe this is when the change occurred but rather when the color was officially abandoned socially. Color has obvious cultural ties, but I was surprised to learn about it’s medical ties as well. Color effects our emotional state and even changes in our endocrine and cardiovascular system. Of all the colors available, pink carries the most power. I used to think that the color blue was calming and lowered blood pressure.
However, pink is the the distinguished medical color. It lowers the heart rate, pulse and respiration. Since pink is such a dominating color I didn’t believe this at first, but studies showed that the color pink did in fact produce these results and it even lowered violence in prison cells. Prison cells were painted pink in order to see the effects the color would have on prisoners, to my surprise there was no violence at all.
With this knowledge I believe we are doing this color and society an injustice. We shouldn’t limit the power of a color that has infinite medical possibilities based off of our cultures’ association of the color pink. Even though the color helped the inmates with aggression, it was not adapted in other prison cells because people found it embarrassing and not the norm. If we as a society continue to stereotype and generalize things of this nature we will never progress and move forward.
In current events the color has become a symbol of protest, specifically in relation to the recent women's march. It has been used to promote unity and empowerment,similar to World War II when it originally became popular. I think Byrne raises some very important questions while highlighting the significance of color.