Aloha...

Alright... wow, end of the semester. Damn. It was lovely to meet you all and hear about your artistic interests this semester. I really enjoyed hearing everyone's presentations, and it actually was fun to do our own research and create a blog, etc. Awesome way to bring creativity back to the classroom!

Thank you and have a lovely Christmas break!

-Emma

Art in Public Education

My presentation explored the past, present, and future roles of art in modern education. It focused on the current tragedy that art is disappearing from public schools and propose a solution through reintroducing creative thinking in the classroom. I was drawn to this subject initially because I am taking Dan Faulk's Political Science class, which pretty much says it all. His whole class is modeled on the fact that our education system is broken and needs to be fixed. In the T.A. session, we watched a number of TED talks and videos that discussed the role of art in public education and I decided to start looking into the matter further. It was really interesting to see how arts education started and how it got to where it is now, not to mention this all tied in with what we were reading in Ellen D. about a "new aestheticism." All the cards were kind of pointing in the same direction and I didn't feel like I wanted to do a presentation about an art form, but rather something relevant to our everyday lives as students and human beings in the modern world. 


Like I said, I began with these videos and the book the Element, recommended to me by a friend of mine. The Element, written by Sir Ken Robinson, is all about arts education and finding your element in which you excel. I found it extremely inspiring and began to look into journal articles about federal policy, creativity, imagination, art, and public schools. I had originally intended to interview artists and a couple of school teachers, as well as one of my peers, but I had difficulty getting ahold of people and confirming an interview time. I ended up being able to conduct an interview with one teacher, an HSU alum, through email for which I have great gratitude. My research didn't contradict my thesis that schools  are killing creativity and arts education is disappearing, but it did surprise me that there are a number of people trying to bring the arts back. At this point, I found a lot of evidence for after school programs and supplemental activities, which is all great. But art still isn't integrated fully into the classroom yet at the level it should be. 


If I were going to do a follow up research question, I would be interested in looking at specifically what people are doing to bring the arts back into schools. While I did come across a few great examples, I think this would be a nice way to follow up the problem with solutions. Another interesting thing would be to look at how the "new aestheticism" has affected the global culture rather than just that within the United Stated. What is the role globally of arts education? Or are there certain countries who have an education model that we can emulate? Maybe this would propose yet another group of solutions for fixing this broken education system. 

Pilobolus Performance

I saw Pilobolus when they came to HSU in October. They performed in the evening at Van Duzer which is a small intimate theatre. We got the last two seats on the floor and I was expecting the view to be crappy since we were in the very last row. Quite to my surprise, these are great seats and I had a perfect view unobstructed by heads! It used to surprise me that I rarely saw young people at dance performances, but I'm used to it by now.  The audience consisted of a majority of middle-aged to older folks although a few students were present.

I was not familiar with the dance company outside the colorful fliers of men and women doing incredible weight-sharing acrobatics that I'd seen around campus. Their show consisted of five very different pieces. The first was a story piece about a traveller: a man carrying a suitcase and his journey. There were props in this piece, mainly chairs, which the company manipulated throughout to create different geometric shapes and patterns on the stage. My favorite part was when the man fell asleep and two of the dancers held up a white sheet with their toes where we watched the man dream. I found this piece very moving, especially at the end where the man was being carried.
 (You can watch it here: http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=PilobolusDance&annotation_id=annotation_427660&feature=iv&src_vid=Trvj984a2ds#p/a/u/2/gOO5FT35Ubs)

Their second piece was a solo performance for a young man in a red unitard. Throughout he demonstrated a mastery of muscle control and fluidity almost unbelievable. It seemed like he was gliding across the stage at times. He had mastered his body to be able to move between levels seamlessly.
(You can watch here: http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=PilobolusDance&annotation_id=annotation_427660&feature=iv&src_vid=Trvj984a2ds#p/u/7/eO8GK0DE6ZM)

The third piece is my favorite work of dance I've seen to this day (and I'm a dancer so I've seen a lot of dance performances)! It was a black man and a  white woman, wearing nude costuming, telling the story of, what I perceived to be, humanity. They appeared to grow out of the floor...I actually had to blink a few times to make sure my eyes weren't playing tricks on me. Neither of them stood up until about 1/2 way through the piece, and we didn't see the woman's face (which she kept covered by her hair) until almost the end. This use of space was really phenomenal. Eventually they came together in an extremely sensual manner, even sexual, I thought. Everyone in the audience was totally enrapt. No one was even blinking. What made this piece even more moving was the live flutist which I didn't notice until I heard her take a breath over the speakers. It was raw and organic and absolutely beautiful.

There was an intermission after this piece and I saw people looking around at each other with wide eyes, "Wow" written on their faces.

The fourth piece after the intermission was radically different from the first two. They had built a big metal box with a glass sheet on top which they would dance on. A camera underneath the contraption would project their bodies onto a huge screen. I have never seen anything like this! The program told us that this piece had been choreographed in collaboration with band OK Go. (Here is an example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ur-y7oOto14). The dancers created geometric shapes and patterns with their bodies which we saw on the screen. It was a fun piece and very innovative.

I must precede my description of the last piece by saying that I really disliked it. It was performed to Radiohead and Primus. The costuming was garish and the movement was the antithesis of the second and third pieces. It was spastic and choppy. Don't get me wrong it showed incredible muscle control and strength, but I did not find it aesthetically pleasing. I'm not sure it was meant to be as aesthetically pleasing as disturbing anyway.
(You can watch here: http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=PilobolusDance&annotation_id=annotation_427660&feature=iv&src_vid=Trvj984a2ds#p/u/4/hBPafUYYJe4).

The venue itself is great. It's small enough to make you feel close to the stage even when you're in the last row and the acoustics are wonderful. One dramatic difference is the style of choreography in the pieces choreographed in the 70s (the second and third pieces) compared to the pieces choreographed in 2011 (the final two). I personally am more engaged by the more fluid style of choreography that was popular during the 70s as opposed to the very choppy and disconnected movements often found in contemporary pieces. The music also played a large part in my experience because I have a hard time listening to Primus and Radiohead: it's obnoxious noise. Considering the first half of the show, the ending left me feeling jarred as I walked out of Van Duzer. This was definitely an example of making special to the point that I've never seen anything like it before in the one sense. It was also a reminder that even dance culture changes over time as evidenced by the change of choreographic styles while still maintaing that thing which we recognize as "dance".

The show wasn't what I expected at all. I had seen brightly colored costumes on all the fliers and expected levity. We got none of that. Instead we got a show with serious undertones. Although I am primarily a ballet dancer, I occasionally dapple in modern dance. When I see such talented dancers performing pieces like they did in the first half, it makes me want to take modern class. But then I inevitably see where modern choreography is today and I am so happy I'm sticking with ballet.

Objects Talk: The Social Life of Objects

Arjun Appadurai's concept of the social life of objects addresses the relationship between people (culture) and the objects within their culture. It is easy to understand how people affect objects: we interact with and manipulate existing objects, we create new objects, and destroy old ones. In this sense we create a material culture imbued with value. But we also exist within it. Think about the house you live in or the clothes you wear. These things shape your identity and your experience as a human being. You might choose your clothing but your experience is defined by the way you interact with others based on their perceptions of you.

The same thing can be said about art objects as well. For example, we see an example of ethno-aesthetics in Fast Runner being represented through the social life of film. We see traditional methods of hunting, transportation, ceremonies, dress, gender interaction, etc. in the film. The film attempts to convey social messages and the identity of this tribe to viewers per the tribe. We could say that the objects in the film themselves have a social life since they define the way these people live. Using dogs and sleds allows for certain hunting practices and it makes carrying burdens far distances easier. Using igloos as shelter grants protection against the climate, a place to stay warm, or prepare food. Larger igloos can be used for ceremonial feasting, etc. Without these igloos the daily life of these people would look quite different. They serve a utilitarian as well as a social use. The film as an object itself also has a social life on a more global scale since it is widely distributed around the world as an example of this tribe. The film determines the way we see these people and our understanding of their culture. It is a medium through which a global conversation is taking place.

The concept of the social life of things is very important in the modern era of globalization and hybridization since cultures must be able to  converse with other cultures. It also applies to cultural elements and events. This relates back to the article we read about Amalia Mesa-Bains who said that in designing her museum exhibit their goal was to maintain the integrity of Mexican culture but to look at spiritual traditions across cultures. Like we talked about with HIV/AIDS art, in order to understand the AIDS issue in South Africa you have to look at the issue on a global scale.

Dance Dance Dance!

The article, An Anthropologist Looks at Ballet as a Form of Ethnic Dance, was particularly interesting to me because I am a ballerina. I have to admit that I'm not sure I have ever thought of ballet as ethnic dance, but after reading the article I would wholeheartedly agree with Joann Kealiinohomoku.

The first thing she wisely does it to clarify that ethnic dances do not imply primitive dances. In fact, there are no such thing as primitive dances but rather dances performed by primitives and these dances she says "are too varied to fit any stereotype" (34). Nevertheless there is a primitive dance stereotype (disorganized, frenzied, no technique, resembling apes and birds!, lots of stomping) which is one of the reasons that Westerners rarely think of ballet as ethnic dance. She spends a good portion of her argument advocating the idea that there "is no such thing as a 'primitive dance' form" (37).

She then goes on to define key terms in order to help dispel the false idea. She begins at the beginning by defining the term dance itself: "a transient mode of expression, performed in a given form and style by the human body moving in space. Dance occurs through purposefully selected and controlled rhythmic movements; the resulting phenomenon is recognized as a dance by both the performer and the observing members of a given group" (38). One distinguishing factor of her definition is the aspect of intent. Other key terms are folk dance and primitive dance. Primitive culture and hence primitive dance tends to be self-contained and autonomous where peasant cultures are not autonomous and folk dances tend to reflect the smaller peasant culture within a larger culture. Finally Joanna defines ethnic dance and concludes that "every dance form must be an ethnic form" (39).

Ballet is a perfect reflection of ethno-aesthetics of the Western and particularly European worlds for all the reasons Joann writes about in the section the Ethnicity of Ballet. I recently went to see both Pilobolus and the Trey McIntyre Project at Van Duzer. While both groups performed contemporary works the movement reflects the current dance aesthetic in the west. Pilobolus opened with three pieces two of which were choreographed in the 70s and were very sensual reflective of American culture in the early 70s. They reflected a focus on the human body and the earth. We see incredible lines, extended legs, stretched arms, and pointed toes per the classical aesthetic. The latter half of the show contained pieces choreographed in 2011 which were much more spastic and jerky (I'm not sure what this is reflective of...a feeling of disconnection maybe?..., but this seems to be the way dance is moving these days). Trey McIntyre was a perfect example of the spastic jerky style of movement as well. The dancers also wore red, white, and blue costumes in their first piece and we frequently saw female-male partnering sequences which is typical of classical ballet. Of course there was an intermission, a curtain call, applause, etc. I will be performing in a classical ballet in March where you will see village scenes and traditional wedding scenes using sets that invoke scenic familiarity to ballet-goers, mannerisms, pink tights, pointe shoes, etc. that define the ethno-aesthetics of classical ballet.

Trey McIntyre Project

Pilobolus

Local vs. Global: An Epic Battle

Ethnoaesthetics defines the anthropology of art. It essentially refers to the study of beauty through the eyes of a particular culture. It demands a cultural context. In turn ethnoaesthetic analysis demands (the anthropologist's two favorite words) cultural relativism. It demands that we understand something about a people before we can understand their art. This is certainly true of the Australian tribe in Waiting for Harry as well as for Mexican artist Jose Posada. If I didn't understand the funerary ritual being performed in Waiting for Harry or the political and social turmoil during the time of Posada, the art would carry little to no meaning. Looking at Posada's work within its context, it is easy to understand.

This piece is titled Happy Street Sweepers. The skeletons make perfect sense once we find out that this representation of death-- the calavera-- coincides with the Day of the Dead celebrations. Images such as this are a common way to celebrate the lives of ancestors, to celebrate tradition and the past. Posada's work frequently portrays common people doing everyday work, as he might have seen on the streets of Mexico in the early 1900s. His art "critiqued injustices of the time," such as the poverty we see in this picture. This is an example of ethnoaesthetic analysis: a sense of aesthetics through the eyes of a culture.

It seems to me that it is fairly obvious to see the strengths of ethnoaesthetics, but its weaknesses have only become apparent in the modern age of hybridization and globalization. Traditionally, anthropologists studied small scale societies on a local scale, but very rarely anymore do events take place on such a small and isolated scale. Ethnoaesthetics doesn't take into account the extent to which cultures today are hybridized, that is, mixed together. Even indigenous art has radically been altered in many cases by tourism or relocation. Tomas Ybarra-Frausto explains that hybridization, the ability to adapt to the modern world, is what saved many indigenous cultures from extinction. Yet now we are threatened by the idea of a global hybrid mono-culture where ethnoaesthetics don't really exist. Artist Amalia Mesa-Bains addresses the question of how to celebrate (and on an even more basic note, maintain) a cultural aesthetic while still appealing to/surviving in a global community. In other words, what is the role of ethnoaesthetics in the modern world? Her answer is that you will find "the same elements in all groups." We absolutely must celebrate diversity to avoid a "monolithic sense of culture and community" and yet there is the possibility of connection among groups, of establishing a common ground, of ethnoaesthetic appreciation. While globalism is the reality, underneath it all, there is still the seed of local tradition and it must be cultivated.

The Art of Language

After reading chapter two of Anthropology of Art and watching Waiting for Harry, we got a pretty good idea of the relation between art and social life in certain "primitive" societies. The next chapter we read was about art and visual communication and one of the most interesting sections was about art and language. Layton shows the relationship between the two and we can see that in a sense art functions the same way that language does.

Layton quotes Durkheim on symbolism: "...without symbols, social sentiments could only have a precarious existence...social life, in all its aspects and at every period of its history, is made possible by a vast symbolism" (93). He goes on to discuss the example of the totem in Australian religion where "objects selected as totems are frequently insignificant...so it is not the intrinsic nature of the thing whose name the clan bears that marks it out to become the object of the cult" (97). Instead, it is the value placed on it as a symbol, as something representative of something else. This tangible representative symbolism is what gives the totem its sanctity and power.

He then compares the creation of language which has two components:
" a) the division of experience into an ordered set of mental constructs,
  b) the convention association of each such construct with a specific set of verbal sounds" (99).

In other words, the combination of the tangible/ physical thing itself (the lines and dots that make up letters and words) and then the abstract association of sounds that follows makes up the symbolic construction of language. The signifiers and the signified.

After rambling on a bit more, Layton touches on something truly significant. "The arbitrary association between the signifiers of spoken language and the objects they may denote apparently distinguishes language from art, tempting us to assume that while we could not understand African speech without learning the appropriate language, we might be able to understand the art of that language's speaker" (100). As anthropologists, maybe this is the most important lesson we can get out of the anthropology of art. Art, just like language, contains cultural grammar rules and different words have different meaning in different cultures.

I never thought of it before, but Layton points out that speech is a ritual, perhaps, in fact,  the most universal ritual practice of all. One interesting difference is that language exists through the collective (it serves the purpose of allowing for dialogue) whereas art may or may not rely on the collective. Layton doesn't go into detail, but I think there are both collective and individual experiences of art which goes back to our discussions of Ellen D's aesthetic experience and making sense.

Obvious example of artists using text, rather than images, as a means of (visual) communication.