Monday, February 25, 2013

Thoughts on Kaprow, Weschler, and Saunders


The Kaprow article placed an interesting emphasis on the daily boring routines that usually no one notices and pointed out how the actions we so easily do now were so hard to do and difficult to learn as children. I also like how he basically paid so much attention to what he was doing that he felt new things, like the tension in his elbow, which I relate to when a word is repeated over and over, usually out loud, when it loses meaning. I didn’t like this article because it just doesn’t seem like art to me, and more of just an observation, but observation is important in art so I understand where the narrator is coming from.
The Weschler article was interesting in how it described how the artist became enamored by the absence of anything in deserts, and more generally, nature, but never became obsessed with the actual science of nature and didn’t really like nature that much at all, never camping or leaving society for too long. What I didn’t like was the first picture was incredible creepy and how it seemed like he was trying to make a distinction that was not there, or at least not apparent to me.
The Sauders article was by far the most interesting, I find a strong narrative always is good to hook me and keep me attentively reading, and the airplane story was a good way to start. The near death experience rings true to me, with the one word “no” thought running through his head, because I got into a car accident and all I could think was “fuck” the whole time. I like how the main topic is death and how it affects your view on the world and art. The only negative is how expansive it was, the article was very long and almost a biography on the man, which I think could’ve been shortened.

No comments:

Post a Comment