Art Critics Help Viewers Perceive, Interpret, and Judge Artworks.

i think this statement is true, but i dont think it applies to all artworks. i think it should only apply to artworks that were created by the artist with a clear purpose. when there is a clear purpose, people tend to narrow down their options, and keep their eyes focused on the goal. so, for example, the Impressionists always aim to capture the fleeting light in their paintings, so their artworks always show the difference in lighting during different times of the day, or even different times of the year. one such example is Monet's famous Haystacks series.


the left one is painting during sunset, and the right one is painting on a foggy morning.


the left one here is painted near the end of summer, and the right one is painted during winter.

so when the artwork has a purpose, it most likely will show in the artwork. and that's when the art critics, with their art education and all, would be able to scrutinize the artwork, and see things that normal people are unable to see. through the eyes of a normal person, maybe Monet's painting of haystacks over and over again would get boring over time because they dont understand is so interesting about painting the same object repeatedly. but through the eyes of art critics, they are able to identify the different elements in an artwork and hence, understand the artwork too. this would make artworks more interesting to them, and after knowing the true meaning behind the artwork, based on their personal views, they will also be able to decide whether they like that artwork or whether they dislike it.

somehow it feels like they are the spokesperson for art.. but that's just what i feel. because if there were nobody to introduce art to normal viewers, unless the artwork makes a deep impression, they wouldnt be intrigued to find out more about it or even develop an interest in art. art critics are there to provide their own point of view, and shed some light for these viewers. with more information, they can develop their own views of the artwork, and maybe even develop an interest in art.

for example, Cubism. initially, i didnt really like it. it is so abstract, so avant-garde, and was almost too abstract for my liking. i mean, just look at this:



it's just a brown background with some shading, and random lines. if i didnt know anything about Cubism and if i werent in AEP but i saw this painting, i would never have known that this painting is a guitarist that is broken down into geometric shapes by Pablo Picasso, and i probably would have lost interest in it.

thus, i think that art critics really help viewers form their own opinion of artworks, especially viewers with no art education or interest in art.

however, i think that there are limits to how much art critics can help a person perceive, interpret and judge an artwork. for abstract artworks, i dont think there's an absolutely "correct" way to interpret them, especially if they were made without a clear intention in mind. if the artist created a completely abstract artwork, or even Dadaists who created artworks by chance, how, then, are art critics supposed to interpret them "correctly" when the scope is so wide that anything may be considered?

AEP Coursework: 1st Submission (part 2)

CLICK TO ENLARGE~

so.. my checklist/planning is in part 1, so i'll just jump straight into the furniture.


designing the bed.


designing side table.



designing shelves.


designing the mirror?



designing wardrobe~


designing the chair.


playing with the layout of furniture in the room.


chosen the final layout.

i think im quite inconsistent with my quality of drawing when i draw the furniture that i designed? because when i look through the scans, i can tell some of the lines are not parallel when they are supposed to be and then it looks weird. this can be seen in the page where i design the side tables (idea 2). however, i think the general idea is still there.

also, i think i should have used rulers for all the drawings instead of just some. but after awhile i dabbled in drawing 3-point perspective at an eye-level, which is shown in the 2nd page of when i was designing the shelves. and i think it looks more realistic than drawing 2-point perspective from bird's eye view all the time. but 2-point perspective from bird's eye view seems to be the easiest and hence the quickest, so i always use it when designing individual pieces of furniture.

AEP Coursework: 1st Submission (part 1)

CLICK ON THE IMAGE TO VIEW A BIGGER VERSION OF IT IF IT IS TOO SMALL


this page shows my thought process from the beginning.


this is my planning for each of the individual rooms. it's also like a checklist for me along the way, to keep track of what i intended to design but havent yet.




i used these 3 pages to design the bed for the childhood room..


designing the lighting..



designing the wardrobe..


designing the window seat..


bits of the start of designing the window seat are shown here..
as well as my first idea layout (overall view), and the more 2D/3D version of the room in that particular perspective. i think it wasnt drawn very accurately though, but it's just a rough sketch.


final layout (top view), and a 3D (2D??) version what the room looks like. it's a draft for now, because i want to show the final outcome by drawing a 3-point perspective, i hope that's what it's supposed to be called (looks more realistic than what i have already drawn).

overall, this is the foundation for the childhood room. i intend to design most of the furniture for all of the 3 rooms. all of them would have a final layout as well as a 2-point perspective draft and a 3-point perspective final. im still practising for the 3-point perspective ones, so i will only do them after i finished all the 2-point perspectives drafts for all 3 rooms. and at the end of all the 3-point perspective drawings, i'll experiment with colour for all the 3 rooms i think, and see how it goes from there.

for the first submission, i submitted the childhood room and the adulthood room. (adulthood room scans will be in part 2 of this blog entry. anyway, for the childhood room, i realized that drawing still-life drawings with thin, light outlines will make the drawing more realistic as compared to bold outlines. initially i drew the flowers with bold outlines and they looked flat like cartoons. apart from that, i think that my faber-castell pencil and my lyra pencil have different textures when i use them to shade.. this can be seen when i designed the wardrobe. on the first page, i used the faber-castell pencil and on the second page, i used the lyra pencil. (maybe it's not visible on digital scans, but more visible in real life though)

lastly, i think i need to improve on my 2D & 3D drawings. so i think there should be an improvement when i start to design the elderly room. :D

Lucia Hartini "Srikandi"

a) Describe the use of space, colour and brushwork.

The space in this painting is very dominated by the female character and the brick walls. The left side of the brick wall in the painting is a straight, slanted line that runs across the painting, as though it divides the foreground, consisting of the female character and the brick walls, from the background, consisting of the cloud-filled sky and the moon. Also, the brick walls seem to extend further beyond the painting’s boundaries, hence the space displayed in the painting appears to be rather confined, thus increasing the viewer’s attention on the female character. The dominance of the female character in the foreground also indicates the amount of emphasis Lucia Hartini has placed on her. This could be because Lucia Hartini sees herself as this resilient and sturdy character, which was actually inspired by Srikandi (a brave and bold female figure in a Javanese shadow puppet).
Where the straight line of bricks divide the painting, a strong contrast, between the vast freedom in the sky and the small, constricted space between the bricks walls, is created. The character, however, is located in the constricting space between the brick walls, which could suggest that Lucia Hartini feels very restricted in real life due to her social status. Beyond the thin, straight wall of bricks, there seems to be a small piece of sky in the painting. This small portion of the sky could represent the little freedom she owns in actual fact.
The colours used in this painting are mainly orangey-brick red and deep blue. These two colours are contrasting, and when placed side by side, they compliment each other and create a striking effect, catching the eye of the viewer easily. Red-orange tends to portray aggression and thirst for action, and suggests that Lucia Hartini's artistic capabilities could be supressed in real life. The deep blue dress worn by the female character compliments her strong stance with her hands akimbo, and surrounds her with an aura of power. Blue was also a colour worn by women's armies of the past who had the duty of protecting the Sultans of feudal Central Java, so Lucia Hartini may have intended to portray this person or herself as a brave female warrior. Deep blue against the red-orange, again, places more emphasis on the female character. The colour of the female character's skin is a tanned brown and appears to be glowing with energy and might. This portrays the female character as a strong person.
The colours in the background are the opposite of the colours used in the foreground as they are softer and less eye-catching. The light blue brings out the weightlessness of the clouds, and the pale yellow light softens the whole image altogether. The combination of light blue and pale yellow successfully depicts the vastness of the azure sky, exuding the idea of freedom. The gentle addition of the moon in the sky adds on to the calming effect, imitating the tranquility one would feel when gazing at the moon in real life.
Lucia Hartini's brushwork is similar to that of Surrealist Salvador Dali's in the sense that their brushstrokes are both exceptionally well-blended despite the fact that the details are meticulously added. As a result, they both create very realistic-looking images of the fictional world they create in their paintings. In this painting, there is a very obvious contrast between the fluidity of the dress and the hardness of the brick walls, no doubt done by her remarkable brushwork. Lucia Hartini's brushwork has conveyed her intention to contrast the flexibility of the dress and the brick walls. Her refined brushstrokes enable the viewer to see every crease on the dress and every crack on the wall, reinforcing the fact that the brick wall is unable to create the same flowing effect as the dress. This could represent how Lucia Hartini herself, in real life, has to compromise herself in order to deal with the criticism of the male-dominated society.


b) Comment on the influences behind this work.

The most obvious influence behind this work is Srikandi, because that is the title of this artwork itself. Srikandi is a Javanese shadow puppet of the Mahabharata epic, and is a brave and bold female character who projects a daring, strong and powerful image. She is the archetypical "Warrior Woman" of the Southeast Asian legend. Inspired by this, and as a result of her environment, Lucia Hartini has portrayed herself as Srikandi in this painting as the face of the female character very much resembles her own face in real life.
Lucia Hartini was born as a Catholic in a predominantly Muslim environment. The Muslim culture believes that women were born to serve men, and thus brings about gender discrimination within the Indonesian society. Women were only expected to cook and have children. This stereotypical expectation of the society may be diminished in the modern countries, but it still exists in the Indonesian world. Lucia Hartini, who chose to study art and pursure a career as an artist, has become a target of scrutiny for the critical society.
During the early years of her career, she hardly drew any human figures in her artworks, let alone a female character that resembles herself (like in Srikandi). It shows that she has come a long way from being a fearful victim of domestic violence to the secure, self-assured woman she is today.
Srikandi was an artwork marked the start of her newfound self-confidence. From the late 1970s up until she painted Srikandi, Lucia Hartini mainly painted female figures that were weak and vulnerable, just like what the society expects women to be like. However, over time, through her own experience, she decided that women should represent themselves as capable equals of men.
Living in an environment where straightforward methods of expressing herself were unacceptable caused her artworks to be filled with symbolism. These symbols help her to convey her innermost emotions subtly, allowing her to avoid the criticsm of the society. In Srikandi, Lucia Hartini has depicted how close she is to breaking free from the prison of tradition, represented by the cracked brick walls. She has conveyed her yearning for freedom through the serene sky. She has showed the viewers how strong she has become by portraying herself as the female warrior, Srikandi. Lastly, the female character in the painting is daringly looking back at many disembodied eyes. These disembodied eyes represent the society's scrutinizing eyes, which, to Hartini, felt like they followed her wherever she went and always wanted to watch her business.
In her previous work, Spying Eyes (1989), she had also used disembodied eyes, but those disembodied eyes overpowered the female character in Spying Eyes (1989), leaving her in a vulnerable foetal position. However, in Srikandi, she is staunchly staring right back at all the eyes, which demonstrates how she courageously fights for her own footing in that society. Srikandi is a work that sums up how Lucia Hartini became a confident and strong woman.

Done On: 29 March 2011