Personal Study

Can art and design be used to strengthen and manipulate our opinions about the world we live in?

My work is based around progression, and whether that means through moving transport or something that is progressing over a period of time like a story. I looked into transport as we can use the TFL to progress around London, but I I questioned whether the TFL was a way forward, or if the bus fumes were as minor as we make out. I looked at experimentation of how I could show stories through still imagery and develop a progression of what is going on.

To help this along one of my influences were Richard Vantielckes. He uses narrative story telling really well through his photography and I looked into his work thoroughly, as it was very conceptual, which was an idea that I liked. I liked the idea of implying concept into his work, because he was telling us a story, and we as viewers were the ones working out what was really going on, and through this we ended up telling ourselves the story because we were taking up our own conclusion as we made our interpretation from each image. The surrounding in the images he took were basic yet he managed to make the most out of it due to the story he was telling as there was a basic scene but through concept and figurative language he managed to draw us away from that and show us the progression through what he was doing and what he was also feeling.

Another artists I decided to look further into was Slinkachu. This artist is based a lot around using objects to narrate the story and through images tell us what is going on.

His work is really effective as they tend to use small figurines that travel in different areas and encounter on different experiences. The way he using the figures in the images us really effective as he uses close us to lose the sense of scale, however he does a shot of the surroundings which leads to the figures not being able to be seen, which is really effective as the image makes us lose the understanding of what we are meant to be looking for. Which is a great concept to have in their photography because we really need to connect to enable us to build that connect and get a understanding of the thoughts of the photo.

From looking at these artists it really help influence my work as I grew a better understanding of how to use the environment around me as part of the photo but also how I can draw attention away from the surroundings in order to draw more attention to what is going on. Continually in their work, they are quite simple technique, although there is a lot of though and time, I can think of how I can use a simplistic design, and make corrections in order for a simple design to become really effective.

Another thing both of these artists do is really build a connection with their viewers as their work is thought through to allow a element for the viewers to try and relate to, in both cases conceptual is the case and by using that technique we really need to absorb the design to appreciate what is going on and how they have gone about it.

To help guide my work and look for further inspiration, I went up London to the TATE Modern. I chose this gallery for its versatility is designs and sculptures and I felt that from going here I could really push my ideas as the high quality outcomes they present. From going there I have a better understanding of spatial awareness and how I can perhaps vary my layouts in order to have a variation of outcomes and impacts. Whilst I was there I drew attention to a design by Roy Lichenstein which I really grew an interest to as his exploration with minimal colour and exaggerated black bold lines really worked as a design. I continued to look at his work because it was pop art style and was very much like Marvel comic books which are very narrative and use bright colours a lot which I liked to think about with my work.

Additionally I had previously looked at Richard Long who really experiment with using his travelling to collectively bring different medias and try and display his movement around the world. One of his sculptures was there which was a collection of white pebbles in circulars within one another. Which I believe he was trying to portray development through time and how something evolves, which may be something he encountered on whilst travelling.

I chose to look at the article ‘Conceptual Art – What’s the idea?’ By Josie Appleton. I looked at this article as it questions the mentality of the designers and also the though and intent that goes into a design. The articles expresses a opinion that may be backed by others so, the articles really in depth shows the element on this type of art and how it is formed.

From looking into this review a statement that stood out as it was making a bold suggestion within conceptual art. The statement is “In some cases, the conceptual art brief became an excuse for laziness. Rather than develop a piece of art, and use it to tell the story of the surroundings.” This question is something that would need to be seen from the perspective of the design, as the concept may be clear to see or we are allowed to make up our own interpretation in order to discover what the outcome of

the design is. Conceptual art is about connecting with its viewers as when we see the ideas that the artist is putting through within their designs. Also mentioned in the article is whether the concept is made for us or the artist expressing their side. If the concept is for us to interpret then that could potentially be heading down the route of illusion and mind games which is quite effective to capture in photos, however it may be the artist expressing their feelings or views on a subject and how they express that is in photographs that show elements which lead into one another to form a story we can see for ourselves by made connections and filling in the gaps.

With the narrative outcome i produced that was a development through images that told the story and then i selected the best ones to create a short story which lead to the designing of them dictating the story. For example i may have used bold expressive colour and lots of splashes of colour which lead to a subtle scenery. This shows a contrast in the stage the story is at and what is going on. Without text this can still be seen and shows the development of the story through the actions the box man makes.

This is the design outcome telling the story without words which is a effective why of using design to show the story going. Therefore the story that the viewers are following may not be the story that i had in mind when designing the piece so im using design in my work to influence what the reader thinks is going on and were he believes its heading. This works as a design technique as there is instant connection with my readers as they are trying to predict the story as its going on and what they see and think is happening may not be the process the character is taking.

The way the narrative has been set out its very abstract and surreal which creates the atmosphere that the box man is just a character and the original photos around London don’t resemble whats happened in the next step. Also The scale of the box in images is way out of proportion yet the design allows that to make sense and still be effective as we would consider the box man to be the same size but yet the man is what is smaller which is something that controlled by the design. Whereas the box can be the same and the figure is a part of the body that is what is connected. This is how design is controlling the image as the way it is presented is the way it is perceived. Which may work or may not as the viewer may be lead to think the wrong idea and my outcome isn’t as effective as it should be but thats not the case.

Within the article they raise a good point whether what we see is real or whether we have put it there to make a connection. This is seen through the quote “So there are major problems with conceptual art - with the approach of emphasising ideas rather than art objects. It leads us to believing what is the primary intention that the artist leave us we lose control over what is real and what is our own imagination.” This quote questions our intentions as viewers of artists work and how we interpret that to ourselves as we trying to find out what the artists thoughts were or are we trying to

look for what we want to see and our opinion in what is the thoughts of the outcome.

This quote connects to my narrative as its seen that the objects and the scale in which they are presented doesn’t seem to show what’s real as its a surreal design because a box would be that over powering. This leads to design and whether what we see is real or not and this article is trying to express whether the artist has put things there for us to find or left there out of blatant sight because we aren’t meant to be able to see them. This questions the artists intent into their work and also our intent as viewers as we look beyond to try and find the hidden message. I want this effect to be produced through my work as its a very effective way of questioning what the viewer sees and how that interpret my work. I want them to be unaware of what’s really happening and following the story. As the designs in my narrative are so bold and expressive it draws attention away from the out of scale figures and the characters situation which isn’t something that i intended to start with but it came across and i could realize through thinking about concept, how that comes about.

To conclude this technique within artists work is really effective as it questions their work a lot which is something i look to do with in my work. Its effective as its creates a surreal element to their work which may be something that isn’t intended but happens anyway. Richard Vantielckes conceptual photography is something that really expresses our thoughts and opinions in his work and through the use of photography and editing we can see a flow of ideas within the need of prompting through text which is something that i took from and used in my work as it allows a variety of story and goings on to be seen from viewers and then there is a connection with my viewers. Also graphically with editing of photos and situations we cant always see what is the truth and the form of art and design is something that leads into that category as what we see may not be what we want to see. So to finalise the question i believe we can leave things available to see but whether the viewers uses them within their judgement is what its about and artists use manipulation of object to transform them into something else.

Bibliography: http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?q=richard+Vantielckes&hl=en&biw=1280&bih=75 5&gbv=2&tbm=isch&tbnid=oGCKRefNf9OzOM:&imgrefurl=http://weheartit.com/e ntry/7953186&docid=hCEebj22Gj7RM&imgurl=http://data.whicdn.com/images/7953186/cardboard-box-headhead-like-a-hole-conceptualphoto_large.jpg%253F1300193890&w=500&h=337&ei=qUsZT6fZIoTd8QOxpIjJC w&zoom=1&iact=rc&dur=437&sig=105292025934308250113&page=2&tbnh=132 &tbnw=164&start=15&ndsp=30&ved=1t:429,r:22,s:15&tx=91&ty=64 http://www.ludimaginary.net/conceptual-photography-2.html http://www.ludimaginary.net/conceptual-photography-2.html http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?q=slinkachu&hl=en&biw=1280&bih=755&gbv=2& tbm=isch&tbnid=VdXYl_6Izei_IM:&imgrefurl=http://www.streetartutopia.com/%3F p%3D1143&docid=eqVIrKLyybVYTM&imgurl=http://www.streetartutopia.com/wpcontent/uploads/2011/01/little_people_street_art_1.jpeg&w=850&h=567&ei=4k8ZT8 _TDdH28QPI1qSbCw&zoom=1&iact=rc&dur=219&sig=105292025934308250113 &page=1&tbnh=120&tbnw=195&start=0&ndsp=20&ved=1t:429,r:9,s:0&tx=33&ty= 25 http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?q=slinkachu&hl=en&biw=1280&bih=755&gbv=2& tbm=isch&tbnid=iB89n2Nbq_l8IM:&imgrefurl=http://littlepeople.blogspot.com/&docid=T3WyNzoeeNZhM&imgurl=https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/_sn46FqbBIu8/TWQ76wPWwI/AAAAAAAABX8/Yi4DrtNXl0M/Boys%252520Own%252520Adventures% 2525201b%252520blog.jpg&w=850&h=567&ei=4k8ZT8_TDdH28QPI1qSbCw&zo om=1&iact=hc&vpx=587&vpy=222&dur=6844&hovh=183&hovw=275&tx=236&ty =135&sig=105292025934308250113&page=1&tbnh=120&tbnw=193&start=0&ndsp =20&ved=1t:429,r:2,s:0 http://little-people.blogspot.com/ TATE Visit

Conceptual art What's the idea?

by Josie Appleton there is a debate about whether conceptual art is real art.

Reports lament that art students spend their time discussing ideas rather than learning how to paint. 2001's Turner Prize winner, The Lights Going On and Off by Martin Creed, was greeted with disdainful cries of 'anyone could do that!'. It is at this time of year that friends and family offer suggestions for Turner Prize entries (my brother's last one was too disgusting to bear thinking about).

But what is conceptual art - and what isn't 'proper' about it? Is it art or is it the viewers naivety.

Conceptual art is concerned with ideas and meanings, rather than forms and materials. Early conceptual artists of the late 1960s began to stick word-plays on gallery walls and submit plans for events as pieces of art. The making of the art object was seen as a perfunctory affair, that could be assigned to assistants or abandoned entirely.

However, it is hard to see how art can ever be just an 'idea'; art only really works when it is a visual experience of some kind. Of course, this visual experience represents ideas, but not pure ideas as are found in speech or writing.

In some cases, the conceptual art brief became an excuse for laziness. Rather than develop a piece of art, and use it to tell the story of the surroundings. Some artists just seemed to stop at the level of their initial insight.

One crossword-style piece by the American artist Bruce Nauman in Tate Modern, produced around the time of the Vietnam War, presents the interlocking words, 'War' and 'Raw'. The fact that 'war' read backwards is 'raw' is a somewhat interesting insight - but is it really a work of art? Compared to explorations into the rawness of war such as Picasso's Guernica, Nauman's work seems embryonic. He stopped where the work should have begun.

Another Nauman work is a piece of paper with 'Make me think me' written on it. According to Tate Modern's labelmeister, this 'raises a variety of provocative meanings' - which, I suppose, is one way of putting it. When Nauman develops his insights a bit more, this tends to result in more effective pieces of art. One of his trademarks was to repeat verbs over and over, phrase-book-style, the effect of which is to make activity seem absurd. In one piece, he develops this idea: two actors on TV monitors read phrases - 'I hate, you hate, this is hate' - out of sync with each other, becoming progressively more agitated. The effect is disturbing and thoughtprovoking - unlike 'Raw War' it is the sort of thing that you might want to come back to.

In other cases, conceptual artists 'add' ideas to objects. Because it is the idea that matters and not the form of the art object, then almost any idea can be added to any object. The forerunner of this was Marcel Duchamp, who in 1917 entered a urinal into an art exhibition under the title 'Fountain'. By giving the urinal a particular title and submitting it as art, said Duchamp, he had 'created a new thought for that object'.

What Duchamp did at least had the virtue of being original - up until that point, the issue of how we define art had not been questioned in such a dramatic way. Among those who followed him, however, this game of naming art objects became a little tired. Rather than explore ways of representing experiences or ideas, it became a matter of showing up the arbitrariness of systems of naming: presenting a plastic cup and calling it 'tree', for example.

When reduced to the 'idea', most modern British art becomes banal Conceptual art refuses to be judged in conventional artistic terms, in terms of the material art object. But nor can it be judged as a pure idea, either. The result is that it occupies a kind of no-man's land, where it is difficult to judge or hold it to account.

For example, the German artist Joseph Beuys gave some lectures in Marxist economics, and called the blackboards on which he scribbled his notes works of art (some of these are in the Tate Modern). Now, it is unlikely that these blackboards contain any shattering insights into Marxist economics - but because they are 'art', and so one-step removed from the person who created them, they cannot be criticised in terms of economic theory.

So there are major problems with conceptual art - with the approach of emphasising ideas rather than art objects. It leads us to believing what is the primary intention that the artist leave us we lose control over what is real and what is our own imagination. But much of the criticism of 'conceptual art' today is levelled at works that are not really conceptual art at all. The label of conceptual art is liberally bandied around, and stuck on to any piece of modern art that somebody wants to discredit. Most of the art in the Saatchi Gallery or the Turner Prize, for example, couldn't really be described as conceptual. Some of the pieces in the Turner Prize involve significant craftmanship, and most aim to create a striking visual effect. They are less about wordplay or definitions than about shocking or impressive images.

You might argue that the Turner Prize pieces are driven by shock-value, the desire to get across a striking 'message' about the degraded state of sex or death. You could say that the piece of art is merely a vehicle for the shocking idea. But if the artists only wanted to shock, then there would be a no-holds-barred rush to shove corpses and live sex acts into the gallery. As it is, the Chapman brothers went to substantial effort to create what appear to be plastic blow-up dolls engaged in fellatio out of bronze - clearly the materials mattered, and the visual effect mattered. It was not just about the message.

In fact, when reduced to the 'idea', most modern British art becomes banal. This is a good sign. Mark Quinn's Self (now lying in the Saatchi Gallery), which involved removing several pints of blood and freezing it in a cast of

his head, doesn't succeed on the level of the idea. The idea is 'I am my blood', or something like that. As an idea, it's worse than alternatives, such as 'I am my class' or 'I am my religion'. Self is impressive as a work of art because of the audacity of Quinn's chosen material - and because of the haunting effect of the finished product, which seems to have the waxy quality of a death mask. Nauman's 'Raw War', by contrast, would lose little on being reduced to the idea.

There is little point in opposing the art in the Turner Prize with some fixed idea of 'proper' art. The Stuckists, who demonstrate outside the prize every year, show how this position easily slips into caricature. Proper art is paint and canvas, they say - which ends up with a ridiculous fetishisation of the medium. It is as if they attribute paint with almost magic qualities, so that you only need take a few brushstrokes in order for it to be real art.

The conclusion must be that, while every primary schoolchild produces art, Damien Hirst does not (one Stuckist recently described his work as 'taxidermy').

In actual fact, painting is just one medium among many - arguably no better or worse than video art, readymades or installations. At a recent debate, the British artist David Cotterrell said that when he moved from painting to other media, he applied the exactly the same standards of self-discipline. It wasn't as if when he painted he was serious, and when he began to use video and interventions he started just messing around.

There are major problems with conceptual art, but modern British art cannot stand accused on these grounds.

Rather than demonstrating outside Tate Britain calling for a return to painting, it would be far better to head inside.