1. Define the 17th century 'Scientific Revolution', and say how it changed European thought and world view.
The scientific revolution was in the seventeenth century where medieval scientific theory was deserted and the more favourable methods that was introduced by Bacon, Galileo, Descartes, and Newton was up taken by society. The name itself “scientific revolution” really is the best way to describe the time as revolution means “a radical and pervasive change in society and the social structure, especially one made suddenly” which can change societies academic thought. It truly did change Europe’s academic thought on a huge scale as previously had really based beliefs on more philosophy for example Aristotle’s conception of ideas as truths rather than scientific experimentation so when the 17th century came around it made people think different of what they had believed for example learning the earth is not the centre of the universe but the sun is instead the centre of the solar system. Being a tough time in Europe which had many social problems at the time which slowly was developing into chaos was able to come back to order after the revolution as society began to question the teachings of the church and search for answers about god and the universe which brought a big change to the social classes in European countries.
2. Give examples of how we can we still see evidence of the 'Scientific Revolution' in the world today.
We know more about the universe today greatly impacted from that time inventions such as the telescope were made in that time. It really is still evident as we now know more so about distance, math and have more knowledge of the universe which are all still our academic thought today.
Research Pipilotti Rist's video installations to answer the following;
3. From your research, do you think that the contemporary art world values art work
that uses new media/technology over traditional media?
I think art work that is portrayed through media and technology is highly valued in today there are great examples that make people really think I think a great example of this is piece called breakdown by Landy which made people question who would they be if all there Id documents were destroyed. I think it is highly valued as it is a different way to visually communicate to people and make them think.
4. How has Pipilotti Rist used new media/technology to enhance the audience's experience of her work.
There are many enhancements made to the video to increase the audiences experience and make them think more into it. One big enhancement is the sound which has been tampered with there is nice music in the background to create a atmosphere for the viewer and also a emphasis on the smashing of windows which is dragged out to really make the viewer think. There is a split screen one emphasizing the beauty of the women’s blue dress and beauty of flowers and the other half showing her destroying the car windows with a flower.
5. Comment on how the installation, sound and scale of 'Ever is Over All' (1997) could impact on the audience's experience of the work.
I think the scale has a huge effect on the viewer it is an overwhelming size spread across two walls and a corner which really makes it the high focus of the room. The sound really sets the atmosphere and draws the viewer in to thinking deep about the message that is being portayed by the artist. I think being in a single room the sound would be a massive factor to the art piece far more than watching the clip over the internet it will really make the viewer feel they are apart of the scene.
6. Comment on the notion of 'reason' within the content of the video. Is the woman's behaviour reasonable or unreasonable?
The womens behaviour is definitely unreasonable it is very interesting to the viewer as it is a obvious unreasonable action but as shown in the clip it is almost portrayed as if it fine to go around and do. There is no reaction from the man walking by and it is obvious a flower cannot break a window so the video really defies the laws of reason in the world today which is what I think is what makes the piece very interesting as the viewer is intrigued by the fact this media artwork shows something that generally never happens.
7. Comment on your 'reading' (understanding) of the work by discussion the aesthetic (look), experience and the ideologies (ideas, theories) of the work.
I think the aesthetics of the work is very effective to the viewer the colour contrast especially with being very floral colours with the women’s blue dress and the beautiful flowers on the other size which are strongly enhanced to emphasize the flowers idea and tie the two halfs of the piece together. The strong close up shots that track over the flowers and occasionally over her dress emphasize beauty which I really think is a strong theme in the peace. The sound and scale of the image really creates the experience of the artwork and helps the viewer see how such a beautiful image can actually cause destruction and helps them to figure out what message is being portayed. I think from viewing the video it represents feminism and how very lady like objects such as the blue dress and the flower as well as what could be portayed as lady like music are smashing a generally male loved object ( a car). Or I also see the video showing how beauty is never as it seems.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_revolution
0 Comments:
Post a Comment