Punctum vs Studium

Of course when going into an art museum or looking at anything really, there are traits that will cause you to 

pause to admire the object in more detail or that will cause you to continue walking as if the object had not existed. Bartes uses two terms that are polar opposite to describe the level of interest that an artwork has on a viewer: “studium” and “punctum.” “Studium” is the factor that quickly draws a person into the painting. It is what makes you stare at a painting or what calls your attention. Above are the paintings that quickly caught my attention as I was scrolling down a collection of paintings. I believe the style I like which I find reoccurring in the paintings that I stare at are those that have a lot of abnormality and contrast to it. The painting with the women and the eye is very different to what one would normally see a women and an eye. This gives room to a lot of interpretation. I also enjoy the contrasting colors in the 1st picture and the brightness of the left side causes my eyes to go back to the painting. These pictures quickly interest me, grab me, and have an effect on me. On the other hand, “studium” is how one likes an artwork but not particularly loving it. It does not have the intense attractive power that “punctum” has. Below are 3 pictures that demonstrate my “punctums.” The pictures are repetitive and boring. There are just a group of colorful circles and to me I don’t really care as much toward them as I do to the paintings above. I feel like there is not a deeper meaning to these paintings

"Adventure"

For an English assignment in which we had to choose an artwork from the High Museum of Arts and interpret the meaning of the piece, I chose “The Avoider” by Michael Borremans. This painting I will admit looked very simple when I walked by it but there were aspects about it that drew me to it. Even when I showed the painting to other students they were baffled at how I could manage to write a 5 page paper on a man standing with a stick. Barthes stated that some photographs attracted to him to the photo and said that this was the “adventure” which lured him in. I believe that this happened to me when I saw this picture, especially when I noticed the double shadow and the contrast between the formality of the clothes but that he was wearing them casually. Also, despite the fact that he looks dirty and that he appears to have been outside, he seems satisfied at the moment. The very reason that I was pleasantly surprised at how quickly I could read into the piece, made me experience this “adventure.” Even though others pass by the painting and never look at it again, I was mesmerized by how the painting seemed to convey a message to me easily. I even told some friends that the painting spoke to me and that is why I chose it. 

The art of theater

This week I have been practicing for Mock Rock which is a theatrical dance that tells a story line. Never acting before, my eyes really opened to how the theater is on a grand scale a live piece of art. There are so many factors that come into play to create the final product. There are architectural designs involved such as building the set on stage and how every prop is placed to help tell the story. Building and designing every individual prop is crucial. Also lighting plays a role which highlights the mood of the play. It is important to know the location of lighting as well as the color of the lights used. Light producers need to be knowledgeable of how combining different colors of lights will produce other colors of light.Sound is an important aspect as well to consider such as songs, actors’ voice, and instrumentals. All of these factors together help to create an art that comes alive. Much like a painting it is open for interpretation and conveys a message. It is simply a different medium of how this message is communicated but theater is very much an art. There is room for different perceptions based on the different people who look at it. The producer creates a product for the audience to interpret just like a painter makes a painting for viewers to interpret as well. To be open minded, it is just another take on a different type of art. In class we have been simply focusing on paintings but just as a reminder there are more forms including theatrical productions.

Clothes = Art

After watching a clip on modeling online yesterday, I realized how clothing designers act as an artist when crafting their intricate clothing patterns. Their different types of cloths act like different types of paint and they go through the same basic process when creating their masterpiece as would a painter. Expanding on the different types of art, clothing as an art brought on a new perspective of what traditional people would categorize as art. There are abstract clothing such as those with objects attached to them or with exaggerated designs on them. The picture in the middle resembles an art piece at the High Museum which was a chair made of many layers of clothes binded together. Just like in paintings, color plays an integral aspect and there are also cultural differences that can be found in the different types of clothing. Not only is it a form of expression but people can actually make use of the clothing and wear it as opposed to simply looking at it. I believe Plato would commend clothing as an art because it is not entirely useless like how he thought paintings were.

 In the chapter “A Rough History of Modern Aesthetics,”  Schopenhauer states that “Aesthetic perception is interpreted as the avenue to optimum knowledge and action, as the acquisition of the correct view of things.” I agree with this that there is knowledge to be gained when a viewer looks at art. I believe that art speaks to those who take the time to understand it and appreciate it. If you glance at it you will not be able to see the deeper meaning. I disagree with Kant who says that, “the object is perceived solely in the presence of its appearing.” I do not think that the purpose of art is solely just to look at it and feel it without learning the knowledge it possesses. A painting has something to say. It goes beyond emotions. Like they say, “A picture is worth a thousand words.” There is more to art than the image. 

Fake Art

 We discussed how a reproduction of an art piece has less meaning than the original art piece and I completely agree with that. Benjamin furthers this when he states, “even the most perfect reproduction of a work of art is lacking in one element: its presence in time and space, its unique existence at the place where it happens to be.” The original art piece has been altered from reproduction and does not have the same meaning because the context has also been altered. It is not THE artwork; it is simply the fake copy of it. It loses the idea that the painter touched it and the history and experiences it endured. It loses the journey the painted had and its conditions. In other words, it loses the “aura” due to reproduction. Just because you have a copy does not mean anything because everyone else has access to a copy just as easily. I think reproduction puts more value on the original because there is only one of the original and a million fakes. The reproduction makes you think that you are so close to the painting when really it makes you farther from it because the aura has been destroyed. 

YOU, ME, and the MIDDLE MAN

When artists create artworks they have a purpose in the details that they are creating. Bal and Bryson states that art is composed of signs that the artist has formed to be interpreted by art historians. They also state that there are 3 factors important to art historians when they do their work which include the sender, the context, and the receiver. The sender is the author (painter, sculptor, photographer, etc.), the context is the text that has signs in it which need to be interpreted, and the receiver is the audience such as the art historian. There is an important relationship between the three. Winston also agrees to these similar relationships. He states, "There is a constant exchange of emotion between us, between the three of us; the artist I need never meet, the painting in its own right, and me, the one who loves it and can no longer live independent of it." There is a connection between these 3 similar elements which communicate together to develop meaning of the art work viewed.


The author has commented on this piece and says that the theme of the series of photographs that this picture is part of is "mankind's complicated and vast relationship with nature." This is the view of the artist/sender. When I, the receiver, look at this photograph, the context, "Decorating Nature," I sense from the artist a creative and aesthetic style to show how humans have interacted with nature in order to make it how they want it to be.  I interpreted the unnatural contrast from the bright blue paint on the plant as signs of humans invading the normal scheme of the plant and the transformations humans impose on the plant part of our own free will. We use do whatever we think is right in our minds to nature such as to enhance it, to make money off of it, or to make it look more appealing but that should not be the case. We should not alter plants. This simply does not work. By interpreting this art work I have shown how the 3 factors work.