Author: Connor Murray

It was extremely satisfying to see the image my partner and I created in last weeks digital workshop printed out on paper in class. Something about seeing the image move from the computer screen onto the paper was very rewarding and inspired me to play with adobe illustrator while I was working in the library today. My second experience with adobe illustrator was fun, however, it brought to my attention how difficult it is to work with the program if you do not have any immediate access to help. I watch the tutorials on blackboard and several on youtube but I was unable to be as productive as I was during the initial class. It helped me realize how complex the illustrator program is, and how one would need an entire course built around learning the program to understand how to navigate without concern. I really want to use the adobe illustrator program for part of my final project but I realize that I am going to need a lot of practice if I want to produce the image I envision.

The workshop on monday was an eye opening experience to say the least. I learned several things from my experience attempting to create a collage (it honestly was my first time ever). The first thing that stood out to me was how meticulous one needed to be when cutting if they wanted create a clean image. I had difficulty cutting out the shapes of human figures as well as cutting out trees in particular. I ended up giving up on the trees as they were almost impossible to cut out accurately around their border. Given the extreme difficulty I had with producing clean cut shapes, I cannot even fathom how Ernst was able to create his collage-book in three weeks. I just do not see how it is possible.

The next thing I noticed, was how this process was inherently improvised. While one may have an idea of an image or scene they wish to depict, the process is improvised because it requires searching through material that is not one’s own, and piecing it together. There is something about tearing apart images and piecing them together in a new way that is very fulfilling and spur of the moment. One simply flips through the pages until something they are looking for appears and then it can be removed from the original source. The fact that the author does not know the exact end image at the beginning of the project makes the art form very interesting and fun to carry out.

Amphigory, by Edward Gorey, was one of the most confusing and therefore intriguing works we have looked at all year. Due to the friendly and childish nature of the characters within his book, one would assume the stories the images describe to be more appropriate for a younger audience, but of course the stories contain mature content. The juxtaposition between Gorey’s child-friendly artistic style and his stories’ content is quite obvious and got me to wonder, what was Gorey’s view of his own artwork? I remembered a quote mentioned in class about how Gorey did not consider his work to be for children, so I looked the quote up and this is what I found:

“If you’re doing nonsense it has to be rather awful, because there’d be no point. I’m trying to think if there’s sunny nonsense. Sunny, funny nonsense for children — oh, how boring, boring, boring. As Schubert said, there is no happy music. And that’s true, there really isn’t. And there’s probably no happy nonsense, either.”  Read more at: http://www.azquotes.com/quote/695116

This Gorey quote seems to perfectly summarize the way Gorey categorizes his work, however, I extremely disagree with Gorey in his evaluation. I think Gorey truly believed and wanted to convince people that his work was not for children, and that sad things did happen in his stories. Having said that, why would one read a book full of his stories if not to receive some sort of benefit or satisfaction? The characters are child-friendly, (actually remind me of characters in Roald Dahl books), why not make the characters in the stories more sinister in nature, to match the events that take place in the story? The nature of the cartoon drawings and the nonsensical nature of his stories make them entertaining and I would argue, have the ability to instill happiness in the viewer. While they may not be child-friendly stories, the stories are happy in the sense that they cause the audience to laugh or smile when reading them.

Une semaine de bonte is filled with several intriguing images. I noticed that Max Ernst repeatedly uses the same animal-human comparisons, however, he constructs the images in a large variety of ways. The collage-book is filled with extremely detailed images containing these animal-human figures, but each image and section is unique and drastically different from the others. Since the collage-book is made up of images that are very different from each other, and because many of the images combined the figures of two different species, I began to think about the creative process of making the collage. The images are clearly put together to form a narrative, but I can’t help but feel like due to the nature of the work (combining body types and landscapes), there must be a great deal of improvisation that goes into the process (at least when tasked with creating hundreds of these collages).

Listening to questions for Yun-Fei Ji and hearing his responses during Wednesday’s class meeting with Yun-Fei Ji was a great experience. I thought the most interesting part of our meeting was the fact that he did not have answers to several of the students questions. I am one who constantly questions whether or not we are overanalyzing the author/creator’s intentions when looking at his or her work. Yun-Fei’s responses made it clear that while he does have a voice in his work, and that his voice is not indifferent, he leaves the details up to the imagination of the viewer. This resonated with me, as I feel that sometimes authors create work that is supposed to be controversial but leave it to the viewer to find their own meaning rather than telling the viewer how to understand what they are seeing/reading. Overall, I really enjoyed Yun-Fei Ji’s responses and gained some valuable insight into the artistic process.

The print workshop was very effective at communicating the intense and tedious nature of the printing process. Despite the time it took to accomplish relatively little, it was very fun to experience the process in person. The galley was more difficult to set up than I was anticipating, and deciphering the correct way to line up each letter was also more challenging than I was expecting. The actual act of using the printing press was very easy and it was very satisfying producing a clean print. I enjoy immersing myself in the process of creating the art form we are studying because it provides a unique lens to view the artwork that would be unattainable without actual experience creating the art ourselves.

 

 

 

The scriptorium experience really helped bring to light  amount of intensity and patience it takes to create an illuminated manuscript. Over the course of creating my “masterpiece”, it became clear that I was much better at portraying some of art better than others. For example, I was very slow at coming up with an idea for a design, as there seemed to be so many potential ideas, it was difficult to hone in on one. My letters were my strong-suit, which would make sense because I have practiced drawing my letters more than I have any other images. By the end of the class period, I was very pleased with parts of my painting, but very disappointed with others (my painting was rather poor). My personal experience showed me that I am more skilled in some areas art compared to others. It allowed me to be truly amazed at these illuminated manuscripts as some were created by one individual, and this individual must have been talented in all aspects of the art form. However, it seems that many of these illuminated manuscripts were collaborated on within their given practice, and this makes sense to me considering my experience painting showed me that I am better at some things than others, and collaboration allows for greater specialization and therefore a chance at producing a higher grade of artwork.