Andy Goldsworth

 

Michael Mont

Andy goldsworth

3/14/12

              Andy Goldsworth is an English environmental artist. Goldsworth uses materials from the earth to make his artworks. It would be hard to categorize his style of art in any other form than environmental. This is because he makes abstract art with resources from the earth around him. His art work usually consists of brightly-colored flowers, sharp icicles, thorns, mud, pine-cones, snow, stone, twigs, and leaves. This is significant because he leaves his artwork in a specific location in nature. The idea behind this is that he plans to give something back to nature. I think this is a really cool idea because all mankind ever does is take natural resources and use them for personal gain.

              Andy Goldsworth has a serious philosophy to his work. Andy Goldworth believes that any art made should be made in the place where the materials come from, and the art work should stay in the place it was made. I think this adds value to his work because not only is it environmentally friendly, but it shows a serious dedication nature. Andy Goldworth said on his website, “I have become aware of raw nature is in a state of change and how that change is the key to understanding. I want my art to be sensitive and alert to changes in material, season and weather.” This being said Andy Goldsworth believes that nature is always changing, and the key to understanding it understands the effects and changes of the season. I think this is really interesting because most people simply overlook the “change” effect. I think Goldsworth’s work has more value to it due to his philosophy’s. 

Ulrike Arnold

Michael Mont

Ulrike Arnold.

2/23/12

           I recently read the article “Earth Tones Ulrike Arnold's Art Literally Rises From The Soil” by Margret Regan. Ulrike Arnold is an artist who focus on ecological paintings. Ulrike Arnold focuses on bringing out colors in natural terrains. She also draws on rocks and caves.

           Ulrike Arnold will draw an abstract oil painting on a canyon. What’s interesting about this is that she won’t just copy the colors, but instead, she will add bright colors that will contrast with the earthy background. The colors generally the same, but she just makes them brighter. This effect is absolutely gorgeous and it adds beauty to an already beautiful place.

           Margret Regan is an exceptional art critic herself. She does an excellent job describing this artist by first describing the background (which would be like a canyon) as something that is beautiful. Then describes what the artist created on top of the background. She also uses tons of fun exciting words like plunge to describe what the painting looks like.

           Ulrike Arnold’s works are very beautiful and undoubtedly worth seeing. It is amazing how someone can paint on nature and make nature more beautiful. The colors she uses are so vibrant, in keeps the viewers in awe for along time. Arnold’s work is truly amazing and worth checking out. 

Steve Gianakos

Michael Mont

2/15/12

Art critic Steve Gianakos

           I read the article about Steve Gianakos in the New York Times called, “Steve Gianakos’s ‘New Paintings’ at Fredericks & Freiser.” It was written by art critic Ken Johnson. The article is shorter than most other art articles in the times, but it is for a reason.  Steve Gianakos is an artist whose main themes are quite disturbing.
           Steve Gianakos is known for his themes of sex, drugs, and violence. He mostly draws things in a cartoon style. The cartoons figures have a very 50s 60s style drawing to them. They kind of look like comics in the newspaper. The images are very graphic and even, disturbing in certain drawings. There is nothing censored in his paintings. Doing an image search, out of curiosity, lead me to find a bunch of obscure disturbing paintings; so disturbing that I would feel uncomfortable attaching a picture of his works in this essay.
           Ken Johnson does a really go job describing Steve Gianakos’ work. Johnson first gives background information on the artist. He says that his themes are very adult and contain sex, drugs, and violence. Then Johnson does give him some credit, “It is just as well that we don’t know what most people think about in the privacy of their own dirty little minds. But in Steve Gianakos, …, we have an exception.” Then Johnson gives the title of a painting then describes what is in them, in just one descriptive sentence; In “She Decided to Throw the Party Anyway,” a curious kitten paws the water of an aquarium in which a girl’s severed head is submerged.
           Ken Johnson does a good job of being an art critic. He described this artist with just enough details to get the point across and not freak out the readers. I think the artist is brave for drawing all those weird obscure paintings; he doesn’t write off any ideas that come to mind.  Overall it was an interesting article and a more interesting artist. 

 

Antoni Tapies

Michael Mont
2/9/2012
Antoni Tàpies
   I recently read the article in the New York Times called “Antoni Tàpies, Spanish Abstract Painter, Dies at 88.” This article is about the life of the Spanish painter who has recently passed, and this article also describes some of the wonderful pieces that he left behind. The article was written by William Grimes and is in the New York Times. William Grimes is a very talented art critic because he very crafty with his adjectives and makes a lot of art references. William Grimes is uses a lot of adjectives to describe Antoni Tàpies work. A major downside to this art critic for me is that he contrasts Antoni Tàpies artwork with others. For example, “Mr. Tàpies (pronounced TAH-pea-ess) came to prominence in the late 1940s with richly symbolic paintings strongly influenced by Surrealist painters like Miró and Klee, a style he abandoned by the mid-1950s as he turned to what became his signature work.” As someone who is not familiar with many different types of artwork, I have no idea who Miro and Klee are; therefore, the comparison is useless to me. But I’m sure someone who is familiar with those referenced artists would appreciate it more.
   Antoni Tàpies has a very primitive style when it comes to his paintings. He usually likes to paint things that look very basic, but then they’ll have an abstract element to it. For example one painting has a shape that is very similar to a church in shape, but the way it is drawn is rather odd; the lines are very wavy like teeth and there is an eerie looking cross atop the shape. A unique element to his style is that most of the paintings look like cave paintings. The image I just described to you has a beige cave like color which cause the art to look so primitive.
   Overall this article was a good read. Grimes’s writing is very descriptive, and he has a strong art background. The author does a good job in describing the art work and the history of Antoni Tàpies. The Artist Antoni Tàpies will surely be missed, and many of his interesting abstract paintings are defiantly worth the view.

Work Cited

Grimes, W. (2012, Febuary 6). Antoni Tàpies, Spanish Abstract Painter, Dies at 88. New York Times. New                          York  Times. Retrieved Febuary 8, 2012, from                http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/07/arts/design/antoni-tapies-spanish-abstract-painter-dies-at-              88.html?pagewanted=1&ref=design

Beth Wilson

       I think Beth Wilson is an effective art critic. She uses lots of strong adjectives to really give you a feeling of the artwork's meaning. Wilson only says positive things about the art work she critiques. In the lucid dream article Wilson only gives you just enough information to want to go and look up those described art works; and even, go to an art exhibit. I think it would be interesting to go and see a variety of different art styles and art works from different cultures.
      In the first reading on Kathy Ruttenberg, Wilson starts off by blandly describing her style or "universe." Kathy Ruttenberg is known for sculpting as well as painting women and nature. As you can see in the attached photo to the left, Ruttenberg often fuses women with nature. Even on their skirts, there is a lot of nature. Wilson also goes on to explain that Ruttenberg is different from other artists because she makes women one with the nature. Overall Wilson did an effective job explaining Ruttenberg's style, form, and uniqueness.
      In the Lucid dreaming article, Wilson describes several works of art. At first I believed it to be annoying to describe something and not show a visual image of it, but I now believe that art critics do this to force to reader to look it up themselves. As you can see in the image to the right looks very interesting. It was only briefly described in the writing, and I had to see for myself, what it looked like. This is a very effective strategy. Also if the art critic posted images of all the artworks they described in their writing it may cause people to not go to those art exhibits. The image to the right is Mary Mattingly’s Mach II. It is supposed to be a crashed spaceship-like vehicle. Overall Wilson did a good job in describing the art exhibit as well as some of the works of art.

Art critics

       Criticism is when someone judges the work of another and places their own opinion on there work. Criticism of any kind attracts viewers to an artwork. To be a fair critic, a critic must fully analyze the artwork, as well as the artist's influence who created the art work. There are many things a critic can judge and criticize in art. Being an Art Critic isn't necessarily what everyone makes it out to be. 
       There are many misconceptions about Art Critics.  Many people and Art critics alike view the title art critic in a negative fashion. Many art critics don't like to view works of art in a negative manor, but instead, they prefer to enthuse art work they like. Most art critics do not denote or make an artwork look bad because Art Critics understand that by writing a negative review on an art work; it would only give it more publicity. Unfortunately most other critics do give publicity to things they don't like.
      Some artists dislike art critics because art critics tend to be interested in their views. An artist creates something because they want to, and because it comes from the soul. An art critic may come along and write a review just to get publicity for themselves, even if they don't like it. Also some critics may come from different backgrounds and cultures, which may sway there opinion. Overall, Critisim comes down to the individual, and their opinions and feelings toward the works of art.
    

Urs Fischer

The reading that I selected was from Vitamin 3-D, and it was about the artist Urs Fischer. Urs Fischer usually sculpts things to be out of proportion with size or out of proportion with reality. Very similar to what happens in the Alice in Wonderland series. His theory is that he doesn't create new things, but instead  he further develops whats around him. This artist's goal is to make the viewer stop and question reality for a second.  The typical viewer would think, "Oh I didn't notice that at first, or I never thought I would have seen that before." Usually its takes the viewers a good couple of seconds to notice whats out of proportion; making viewers like the surprise/anticipation feel. Going through one of his art galleries would be fun because everything is wacky, and it causes his viewers imaginations to go wild.. The author of the writing mainly focused on his artworks and his theory. I was disappointed at times because the author would go into great detail about a really interesting sculpture, and not include a picture of it. The author described the top image I included, but there was no picture in the book of it. The author explained his style and how it was to be interpreted. But the author didn't really give any other background information about the artist. Overall, I think the author did a good job explaining what Urs Fischer's art style and what the artist's theory is all about.