Blog assignment 5: selected posts

from Calia Anderson:

Authenticity in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction

Is authenticity a viable option in the age of mechanical reproduction?  According to Walter Benjamin’s declaration in “Illuminations” that (to paraphrase) “asking for the “Authentic” print makes no sense given that from a photographic negative one can make any number of prints”, I have a number of arguments I would like to put forth. 

First of all, through work in a darkroom, any number of authentic (or original) prints are easily manageable given the direct manipulation of the photographer or developer on the developing process.  Moreover, in the age of digital media and programs such as Photoshop, it is even more possible to have any number of varied “authentic” pieces each with the same starting point. There may therefore be no one authentic print, put any number of them.  This would be adverse to what Benjamin is claiming in that he believes each print would be mechanically reproduced to be exactly the same.    However, that being said, the negative without manipulation would rightly then be put forth as the “original” as it is the picture PRE manipulation during the development process. 

Secondly, I would argue that any photograph is not just a snapshot in time that any camera can capture.  In this sense a photograph is not simply a mechanical reproduction.  The camera still requires a person behind it.  And that person has an eye and a feeling and an ability and desire to capture a particular thing at a particular time.  Even if that person is negligent of all of their own particular wants and needs they still must decide camera angle, lighting, aperture, what to focus on and what to leave out etc.  Therefore, the negative of that image has still been manipulated into being.  There is no such thing as a camera taking a picture.  However, the camera (and the film) is the medium; and as Marshal McLuhan would argue, “the medium is the message”.  It is the nature of the medium that allows us to partake in the particular format of information it is purveying and that directly relates to how we access or acknowledge that information.  Moreover, what we learn or encounter during the use of that medium is also due to that medium.  This might also affect one’s sense of authentic as each person comes from a different place and so interprets the exact same information differently.

I would therefore conclude that the photograph still maintains a sense of the authentic in that not every photographer given the same moment in time, the same place and the same desires would choose to capture a subject in the exact same way.  There may be differences in lighting, angle, focus, depth of field etc that make each photographer’s vision unique.  Furthermore, once that film has been edited it becomes even more so “authentic” as that filmmaker or photographer has manipulated the information to portray a certain piece of information at exclusion of others.  The photographers “eye” is every bit as important as the sculptor’s hand and the Painter’s vision in creating the authentic.  Though many prints of the same negative are possible, and therefore possibly less “authentic”, there still remains the possibility to create several (ad infinitum) different versions of the same original, each authentic in their own right.

Ansel Adams is one photographer who spends a great deal of time in the post-production phase of his photography.  Not only is his eye important for the actual picture taking, but manipulating the image into what he has in his mind is equally important.  His images may be mass-produced and replicated around the world, but I would argue that they maintain their sense of the “authentic” by being authentically his vision, his creation and his eye.  Visions from him, to us.

Ansel Adams:  Leaf, Glacier Bay National Monument

Image from www.anseladams.com

from Amelia Smith:

Assignment Five: Modern Vision

Walter Benjamin argues: “To an ever greater degree the work of art reproduced becomes the work of art designed for reproducibility. From a photographic negative, for example, one can make any number of prints to ask for ‘the authentic’ print makes not sense.”

I disagree with Benjamin’s statement, I think the ‘authentic’ still has great significance even in an age of digital design and manufacture. Leonardo’s Mona Lisa is a perfect example of authentic importance. There are millions of Mona Lisa replicas and merchandise so why would seeing the original be any different? Walter Benjamin says in The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction “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.” He means because of the aura that surrounds the original artwork that makes its authenticity so important to the viewers. Looking at the authentic print makes you one of the privileged and knowing this adds to the aura of that moment. Even an original photograph, before it had been Photoshopped and reproduced for the mass, has some significance even if only for the artist himself.

I think there is still a role for the ‘authentic’ in this age and I have found a way of scaling the importance of authenticity in today’s society. From Marketing, Real People, Real Choices by Solomon Charbonneau, Hughes Chitty and Marshell Stuart, I found a graph used for marketing purposes, which society has been divided into five groups and these groups are a great example of how we value authenticity differently.

Firstly there are the Innovators (2.5%) who are the ‘Trend Setters’, the discoverers and they value the authentic and originals. Then the Early Adopters (13.5%) who are quick on the up take, and value the authentic. The Early Majority (34%) are the Sheep, they follow the mass needing fit in with society. They are less worried about authenticity and more worried about appearance. The Late Majority (34%) are another large group, they catch on later after all the fuss has calmed down. They invest to fit in like the ‘Sheep’ and are not hung up on authenticity rather interested in function. Last are the Laggards (16%) who are behind the eight ball, they would have been the last people on Telecom’s 025 network. They only buy into a product when it has become a necessary part of life, such as a mobile phone. They are the least worried about authenticity, just function and purpose.

This system of loosely grouping society shows that authenticity is not lost in this digital design and manufacture age, it has just become more specific to certain areas. It has just changed its place on peoples list of priorities.

from Henry Roberts:

Modern Vision

In the modern day and age if asked to give someone an authentic print of a photograph any one person would think along the same lines as Walter Benjamin when he says “from a photographic negative…one can make any number of prints; to ask for the authentic print makes no sense” from his 1936 book The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction”. In reality this question is double barreled, you can answer this figuratively or literally.

If one wanted to answer this literally there would be no real authentic as any number of copies can be made and the original lost or never created at all, this applies to all things that are made unless they are one off designs, and even then they can be copied exactly without the knowledge of the creator at all. 

However, if one wanted to answer this figuratively the answer is simple and is something which I agree with also. To ask someone for the ‘authentic’ would be to ask for the photo, piece of art or design which the person who took or made it considered to be the true version made by their own hands. Without diluting it with foreign influences or people. To add to my last statement what better way to show ‘authenticity’ in this day and age than showing the physical embodiment of this statement. The Adidas Original shoes, there have been many replicas made but these are the only one true authentic.

 

Blog assignment 4: selected posts

from Hannah Wilkinson:
Blog Assignment 4: Design and Craft

The main difference of craft and design is the matter of hands on. Craft is very hands on and requires patients and precision, where is design can be done using machines and computers as William Morris points out, machines are evil, and now days craft is becoming a thing of the past. As John Ruskin theory suggests, craft represents the simple life. The simple life is having time and being away from the fast past life, growing your own foods and creating your own things. Craft is more from the heart then having to have things sold in bulk. A personal example of craft vs design is me and my mum, I am doing a degree in design and prefer using computers to create things, where as my mum, creates things at home for the home and has a more hands on approach. It is very hard to see contemporary craft, as things now days can be manipulated to look like craft. My example is a chair made from salvaged trees by Hudson furniture, the designer has really thought about the human body and what is comfortable, what I like about these chairs is that it shows craft and the way you can see the wood grain and how it has been smoothed and molded by person for a person. This to me is contemporary craft, because it is both. http://www.homedosh.com/furniture-from-salvaged-trees-by-hudson-furniture/

from Matthew Graham:
Craft and design are two similar concepts; related like the poles of a magnet. Design is affiliated with academic success, being expensive and exclusive, something which holds rules and rank. Craft on the other hand allows for self expression, creation out of enjoyment with a possible bonus that people love what you do too. With our consumer driven industries of today, finding true craft was difficult. Is jewelery designed to sell or crafted with passion? Are paintings even craft, or merely made for a client? Looking in our back yard however seems to yield more honest craftsmen. 
Lynden Over is a craftsman of glass blowing. Although the craft of glass blowing isn’t modern (it originates from Roman times), the way he operates is a representation of how craft blossoms. He has no shop, no order lists. He has a gallery of his creations, each shaped by how his passion for the craft is released. With each piece unique, the basis of craft - being un-engineered - holds true. What makes Over truly a craftsman is that he creates something which is more than art, more than a crafted rock with a painted face. His craft engages people to see more than a vase or a bottle; people should see an emotion.
William Morris knew that craft was slowly being shunned away from mainstream markets, where the cheap mass-produced objects flourished. Unfortunately this remains true today, where the concept of craft is something which holds value in its price; crafted of the rich, engineered for the poor. Lynden Over perhaps struggles with how he must make his creations a craft for all, not just a corporate gift. The true test of a craftsman is allowing everyone to experience what your imagination conjures up.


from Dana Chan:
Craft vs Design

 

Today, before we create anything we are asked to ask ourselves the big question: is it sustainable? Craftedsystems based in the United States has reached the epitome of craft and sustainability and along the way is also empowering the community.

Craftedsystems products include vessels, rugs and vases; all are produced from sustainable felt by everyday people at the YWCA. Contemporary craft has become less of a hobby left to artisans but has is now something that anyone can perfect through practice and patience.

An increase of DIY websites such as instructables.com which publish articles teaching one the basics of crafting popular items. Not to say that by reading these articles you will be a pro glass blower, but instead, teaching us how to be more efficient with the resources we already have to produce these crafts. So I think that Craftedsystems fully embodies the contemporary expression of craft as they not only consider the sustainability side of their craft but also in producing these crafts they are giving everyday people the opportunity to learn skills which they can use to enable themselves economically.

Blog Assignment 3: selected posts

From Matthew Everitt:

S

Should construction be decorated or rather should decoration be constructed? This was a central issue during the design ‘reform’ of the 19thcentury. Designers began to think about the beauty and utility of an object, and how these factors should be taken into account. Owen Jones argued in his writing of ‘The Grammar of Ornament’(1856) that “Construction should be decorated. Decoration should never be purposely constructed”, Jones was looking at the function of a design before the form and how the decoration of the design should not take away from the function but rather add to and strengthen the idea of its function. A.W.N Pugin had the same idea in his head when he created his principles of design. His principles circled around the idea that design should respect the characteristics of materials, not imitate them. These principles provided a standard for many 19th century designs. Why were Jones and Pugin creating these standards for design? Partly because of the industrialisation of their country. The Industrial Revolution saw the invention of mass-production, this gave the middle class the opportunity to obtain goods easily. And ‘one of a kind’ hand made, goods began to diminish.

The 18th century wallpaper pictured above does not adhere to A.W.N Pugin’s true principles of design but rather to his false principle. The design shows depth and a soft style of decoration. Whereas one of Owen Jones’s or Pugins’s designs would have showed a stronger, stylised pattern of nature rather than the soft bush scene seen here. Because it is a wall the decoration should also be strong to support the idea of a solid wall. I agree with Owen Jones argument , because if an object is designed with this aesthetic it has a stronger sense of its function. Observers of the design will either be able to understand it better or their idea of what is will be reinforced by its decoration rather than misconceived.

from Oliver Bucher:

Beauty and Utility

“Construction should be decorated. Decoration should never be purposely constructed.” Owen Jones, The Grammar of Ornament (1856).

What Jones is saying is that ornamentation should adorn the form of a construction and remain subordinate to its function, not heaped on top without purpose or relevance.

In an age where design had virtually no rules or principles to adhere to, men like Owen Jones, Richard Redgrave and A.W.N Pugin, sought to bring order and consistency into the framework of design, still using nature’s forms ornamentally but in a restrained and abstracted fashion.

The work and principles these men promoted were more of a movement than simply a new style in design.

Personally I agree with the argument that decoration should never be purposely constructed, but do not believe this principle should be applied absolutely. The 32 principles in The Grammar of Ornament are not mathematical equations for calculating the perfect design. Designers must be allowed a certain amount of artistic freedom as long as the function of an object is not lost or hindered by its ornamentation.

Above is an example of decoration constructed. Decorating a pair of scissors to look like a bunny neither adds nor subtracts from their function. Bunnies and scissors have little in common; one would have to take a somewhat strangled route to connect one to the other. The designer of these scissors is simply adding this ornamentation to make them more fun and appealing for children. Upon seeing these scissors I thought instantly of the little girl in Charles Dickens’ Hard Times, who innocently explained why she had no problem with tables and chairs being decorated with flowers. In my opinion this is an example of why one should not apply Owen Jones’ principles absolutely.

Bunny Scissors by Pylones USA: http://www.pylones-usa.com/pylones/product.php?product=369&category=13

And the Bunny Scissors Facebook Fanclub???: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Can-this-Rabbit-Scissors-get-more-Fans-than-Jonas-Brothers/292484563588?v=wall&viewas=0

from Ashleigh Woodmass:

Throughout the industrialisation period 18th-19th century beauty and utility became known design politics in regard to true and false principles of design. During the design ‘reform’  designers questioned the relationship between decoration and construction working harmoniously together. Certain standards were set to ensure that designs were morally and socially acceptable. ‘Good’ design was perceived as the respect of the design construction yet still pleasing the eye through suitable decoration.  

Architect and designer Owen Jones played a huge influential part in the design reform through this industrialisation period in the 19th century. 1856 Jones wrote ‘The Grammar of Ornament’ arguing that “Construction should be decorated. Decoration should never be purposely constructed.” meaning that designs should firstly be recognised for the function or construction of the design and secondly the aesthetics of the design in which there should be no false representation of other designs such nature. This is evident through his work such as ‘Decoration for the Alhambra Court, South Kensington Museum 1863’ and ‘Wallpaper with formalised floral motif’ displaying flat, geometric, repetitive and abstracted patterns enough to recognise that there are aspects of nature such as flowers and leaves yet not represented in a false way staying true to the original aspects and construction of the designs. 

I neither agree or disagree with Jones in respect to his theory on what is good and acceptable design. It is hard to relate to the era in which design was so drastically changing nowadays change in design is more accepted and personal preferences are a huge part of that. The image above is great example of a rabbit decoration that has been purposely constructed into a ring which would be considered a false principle of design in Jones eyes.

Image Reference: http://www.thecoolhunter.com.au/lifestyle