I found the concept these collective pieces confronted. The idea of the medium controlling the content was particularly interesting for me because I never really saw mediums in that way. Now I see mediums as a collective part of the piece as well. Essentially, the medium plays an important role in the meaning of a piece. To me, mediums were just the form of art that we decide to use to convey our points. I see now that the medium we choose to convey our thoughts say much more than I thought.

Marshall McLuhan introduced the idea that mediums, how we convey our ideas, says so much more than the actual message. I find it to be a refreshing viewpoint that has never been exposed to me. I suppose that I’ve never really thought about my own mediums that I use. Never use have I thought about using something other than canvas or paper.

I feel as though McLuhan conveyed this message effectively by using two different types of mediums. When I first listened to the audio I was picturing colorful and vibrant images playing in my head. The jazz and Motown music had this playful vibe going with it. So when I reviewed the book that accompanied the audio, I was confused. The booklet has a more classic feel to it. I almost felt like classical music should have been played while I listened to it. It was a very different story from the audio. But the audio and the booklet were saying the same thing.

I connected this with Mcluhan’s point that visual responses differ from hearing all together. With your eyes, the viewer can choose what they see. Like tunnel vision. If they don’t want to see something they simply have to turn their heads. With our ears, we can’t simply turn them off. We are essentially forced to hear every word. The use of both mediums to display one medium effects the viewer in that they can see the literal point he’s trying to make. The medium directly impacts the message. And the message is something received by the viewer, something they must decode. Therefore the medium effects the way we perceive messages.

Upon listening to Tunnel 57 I was surprised I hadn’t heard of this sooner. I asked myself why we hadn’t learned about things like this in our history class. I also asked myself why we were listening to it. This is a visual studies class why were we listening to a radio show about men who dug a tunnel underneath a wall? Was I supposed to take the radio show as an art piece or the tunnel as an art piece? I didn’t know.

The best art I believe, exposes. And so when I first listened to Tunnel 57 I was shocked. Not only at the fact that I hadn’t heard of this before but also at the fact that I had never exposed myself to this material. I suppose thousands if not hundreds of thousands knew about this Tunnel 57, but I did not, so this piece exposed something to me. Something that is harsh in subject matter and when presented with it I couldn’t help but feel terrible even guilty or ashamed of the things that humans do.

Listening to people who actually lived it and physically were exposed to dangers of war at that time is heartbreaking. The first minute of the piece is a “step by step” plan as to how to detain a population. The methods used were primitive. The people they wanted to keep separate were treated as cattle essentially. It’s a testament as to how war belittles human life. People become civilians, soldiers, causalities, collateral damage; they become numbers and no longer hold the value they once had for the sake of war. Maybe this thinking makes us feel better about war.

That being said, the design of the actual tunnel is incredible. Just the physical aspects and contexts into which they had to dig are unthinkable. The thing that presses me the most is not the tunnel itself, but the context unto which they dug it. How strong must their motivation been to dig under those circumstances? That is what really grabs me about this tunnel. There was so much at stake for them. If caught, odds are they were going to prison. In a place that was likely not to treat them well and yet they still dug. Value held at the quality of their loved one’s lives seemed to be the biggest motivator, but to what extent does that pertain to them? They helped other refugees. The value they held for life in general must have been high. Unlike their rulers, they saw that physical containment of people was absolutely unacceptable, especially for the reason of a dwindling economy.

I should begin by saying that I don’t really understand what Brakhage was trying to say with this piece… with that being said, visually it was very interesting. At times I thought I saw the outlines of faces and bodies and then watching it again I wouldn’t see anything at all but a splatter of paint that looked vaguely like star dust. I watched it several times, thinking I had missed something, but I don’t think I missed anything visually (that’s what I think now). I see though the connection to the concept of Gestalt.

While listening to concept of Gestalt I took an understanding that it was essentially ” The whole is greater than the sum of it’s parts.” Watching the video, the flashes of color create an experience. Although I’m not sure what kind of experience Brakhage was going for I can understand that the individual images of the flashes of light would have meant virtually nothing. Pausing the video I found this to be true. The images being flashed were merely splotches of light and color, but flashing together the propose of the splashes of light became clear.

When I was able to see the images flashes quickly between next to each other I was able to view the piece in a way that I began to look for a propose and I began to look for an identifiable image. His use of containment make the viewer question the images on the screen. It’s almost impossible to not look for visual sense in the piece.The use of containment makes the viewer believe something may be hidden and in turn, like myself seeing faces and bodies, the viewer may begin to see something fully or not intended by Brakhage.

The continuity of the piece, not only meaning the physically act of having different images on the screen but the cohesiveness of the individual images suggests that the images are not at all random but explicitly placed and put in order. The video can not be viewed as a random achieve of images, but a piece in which questions must be asked in order to fully understand it. More importantly the viewer must ask themselves what question Brakhage must have been trying to answer to produce such a piece of art work.

High Concept High Touch– Pink 

As our world goes into the Conceptual Age, creators and artists have begun to have an increasing demand in the economic market. I’ve never really thought about the “new age”. I guess I just assumed that whatever age we were in (which I didn’t even know) would last until I died basically. Pretty naive of myself, but I don’t think new generations of people think of themselves as “new generations” or “trail-blazers”. To survive in this age you can’t be what everyone else is.

With all of the new technology coming into the world, everyone has access to all the same technology so theoretically everyone can put out the same material. What sets the great designers apart from the rest of the population is this idea of high concept and high touch. High concept is this ability to create artistic and sincere images, essentially the ability to create aesthetically pleasing art. High touch is the ability to empathize and understand human interaction. The two abilities are what enable a person to become a good creative mind. I think it’s interesting that these abilities specifically distinguish creative minds between ones that would function not as high level given a specific task.

Another interesting point made in the reading was that IQ does not necessarily predict how a person will do in school or even their careers. A more determining factor was what they identified as “emotional intelligence”. People with emotional intelligence were able to be more creative and personable in the work place. Essentially making them more productive and effective. In emotional intelligence testing they also found less of a bridge between white students and racial minorities.

In the conceptual age, man has become more in tune with his soul and heart to be successful. The ability to be in tune with heart and soul allows for true creativity and understanding of the world around us. This allows us to perform work that can’t be sent overseas, computers can’t do faster, and that satisfies the market.

The Photograph– Flusser

Initially the idea that black-and-white and colored images were purely theoretically was challenging to understand. When I look at a photograph I see the image and view the image as a 2d representation of a 3d object. This is image is merely here for the convenience of looking at an object without having to be physically in front of it. As a read the article I began to understand the art of photography. The images in a photograph are messages to the viewer. Whoever the photographer may be is trying to convey a message through an image.

When presented with the idea that black-and-white images were not really images I was confused. The black-and-white image does exist, but it doesn’t. This is because black-and-white states of being do not exist in real life; it’s merely a theory of the photograph. I never really thought of black-and-white photographs like that. I guess I just always saw them as an edited version of the original photo. Somehow black-and-white photographs always seemed much more honest to me. There was something about the lack of color that left only the subjects and their underlying meaning.

In the article it is also proposed that the truer the color becomes in a photo, the more theoretical it is in relation to a black-and-white photograph. Because the camera is capturing a concept of a color or objects the image coming form that is only a chemical breakdown of that color or object. I understand this as a photograph needing decoding. Because the image is only a chemical breakdown of an object, the viewer must observe the photograph subjectively to decode the meaning of the photograph.

Taking photographs this semester I want to try and convey things through the photographs and not just taking photographs for the grades. Technically I want to learn how to control the camera. I feel like when I took my first round of photographs the camera was not bending to my “human intentions” and realistically the my human intentions should be very clear to the camera and I should be able to execute my ideas, but I don’t feel like I have the knowledge to this yet.

What is Design?– Hara

Going into the major of graphic design I honestly thought it was all about Photoshop and creating shapes and images. Which it is, but I guess what I didn’t realize that the general study and practice of design is much larger than Photoshop and creating images. Design is this genuine understanding of the world around us and communicating this understanding through making things and visual communication. Before I read this article I wasn’t truly aware of the origins of design nor what makes design, design. Now I see design is compiled of the world around us.

When I say design is compiled of the world around us I mean the things we see and experience play crucial roles in the way we look at design and understand the use of it. Japan began to use design as a tool for economic growth after the devastation of World War II. They used it to build their economy. In Japan, the designer was suppressed creatively and molded to the economic needs of the country. This value of the product that many early thinkers of design implemented were forgot simply because japan needed to survive.

Coming out of the age of industrialism, designers have this new playing field to explore. Consumers are now looking for brands. They base their consumer habits based on the validity of a brand. Designers come in and create brands that satisfy consumers’ needs and wants. The things that consumers buy surround them and therefore create their world. Indirectly, designers create the world we live in.

Where Does Creativity Hide?– Tan

Essentially I found that nearly all creativity comes from experiences and questions about these experiences. The things that happen in our lives have a direct impact on our perceptions about life in general. I think the most interesting thing is that experiences don’t make a person creative, how we ask the questions about these experiences make a person creative. Merely having life experiences and adventures means nothing if we can’t ask ourselves the overall meaning of those things. Without the contextual meaning, the experience has lost its value.

Another point made was that these experiences we have are completely random. We don’t choose to have traumatic and life altering occurrences in our lives they just happen. Therefore, every person with a vision for something has different motives behind it. I like to think of it as a group of artists all painting a rose. They’re all painting a rose sure, but the reasoning, the inspiration, the motivations behind the painting of a rose is completely different for all of them. It’s the same with the materials and motives they choose to execute their rose with.

There is also this uncertainty about everything in life. It allows artists and people who need creativity to do their job to question the world around them. With uncertainty we can ask so many questions about life, love, happiness that inspires amazing creativity and output. Questions, I think are the most important thing an artist can do; questions open up the mind to new ideas and allow it to search for answers. Searching for answers with an open mind is the heart of creativity.