Prominent for their work in the 1970s’ Andrew Goldsmith and Robert Smithson when they presented their unique brands of art styles to the public. Considered Postmodern artists due to their unconventional working methods and uses of non-traditional materials. Both artists use nature and natural elements as media in their work as well as often presenting their art in unconventional places.
Protests on the treatment and preservation of the environment were prominent in the 1970s’, reflecting in the art of the generation. Focusing mostly on environmental deterioration and the human role in that destruction. The two artist express their art from two different sides, Goldsworthy focusing on the small areas of nature while Smithson presents his art in large monumental areas. Both artists are considered ‘land artists’ who use non-traditional materials to create
…show more content…
Although his works causes his audience to focus on the landscape surrounding his artwork, Robert Smithson preferred to use the history of the site as a background in his art. Believing that placing the art in a particular site of historical significance, the viewer would be drawn to the environmental conditions of the land, whether it be affected by development, pollution or neglect. He attempts to create structure that are similar to the ancient man-made structures related to religion, art and literature of the area. He also attempts to focus on how his materials are amiss in the landscape. His work ‘Map of Broken Glass’, featuring broken glass shards from a demolished building site in a pile in the middle of a
"I wanted to be the first to view a country on which the eyes of a white man had never gazed and to follow the course of rivers that run through a new land."
Born in January of 1580 in Lincolnshire, England, started out as an apprentice to a merchant before later joining the English army. During his military career he was captured during a movement in Hungary against the Turks. After being enslaved for a time he was sent to serve a mistress for awhile before being sent again on to the mistress's brother. In the hands of this man, Smith was required to do farm work and received harsh treatment. John, in turn of this harsh treatment, ended up killing the man he was working for and escaped to England a short time later (early 1600s).
Both of the photographers are concerned with questions about our collective responsibility in shaping the environments we live in, which reflects in their work. Although they have similar thoughts and ideas, How do they both create a unique style and maintain relevance, status and professionalism in their genre?
John Smith, most people know this name to be man who was the Governor of Jamestown and that he was a hard man. Most people don’t the back story of Smith or how he came to be the man we know today.
I am analyzing the form and content of a stylized painting entitled The Palisades by John William Hill. This was found in the collection section of themetmusuem.org which was painted during the pre Raphaelite movement; when artist emphasized meticulous detail in what was observed rather than imagined nature. This artwork shows the aesthetics of nature, depicting a peaceful scenery with spacious green acres during the year of the 1870s. During the late 18th centuries, natural resources weren’t highly industrialized and that in itself shows how nature was essential for all human species. I argue that this painting shows how everything in nature connects and communicates with one another.
In chapters two and three titled “Sites” and “Movements” respectively, Howard makes the case that there is a “dialectical” relationship between the subject and the landscape (both social and physical) and
This painting shows how close and codependent humans and nature were. How well humans worked together with one another and their world. How peaceful those that are close to nature are, which is why it (nature) must be celebrated and appreciated.
introduction: Some people may say that gladiators were the heroes of rome, but I think that this is unrealistic because, they were really enslaved people with no choice but to fight. just imagine being kidnapped and sold as slaves, then being whipped and forced to fight other slaves in the arena, just for others entertainment! My argument is that gladiators were just poor abused people forced to kill and fight by the corrupt emperors and the ruthless roman masses even if they had no chance or didn’t want to. BP1: TS. For example: The gladiators didn’t want to fight.
During his lifetime Socrates’ various interactions with his fellow Athenians left his intentions debatable. Popular belief in Athens seemed to be that, “he [Socrates] was an evildoer, and a curious person, who searches into things under the earth and in heaven¸ and makes the worse appear the better cause” (Plato, pg. 5) as stated by the unofficial charges against him in The Apology. After discussions, his interlocutor’s were left confused in a state of aporia, with no conclusion. And so while negative views of Socrates became increasing popular in Athens right up until his death, Socrates was, on the contrary, serving as Athens’s benefactor, opening up their eyes to the truth of world in which they lived in. In Plato’s Laches, Socrates
Robert Adam (1728–92) was one of the most important British architects working in the Neo-classical style and was a main force in the development of a unified style that extended beyond architecture and interiors to include both the fixed and moveable objects in a room. He was a essential Scottish neoclassical architect, interior designer and furniture designer of his century. He incorporated design ideas from ancient Greece and Rome into his forms and decoration. His famous London houses include Kenwood House, Osterley Park and Syon House. Robert Adam developed the "Adam Style", and his theory of "movement" in architecture, based on his studies of antiquity, by contrasting room sizes and decorative schemes.
Oil on canvas, presented by Sir Colin and Lad Anderson through the Friends of the Tate Gallery, 1976
Life in the high middle ages, between 1000 and 1300 A.D., had two kinds of communities, manorial villages and towns. The major difference in these two distinct types of communities was the freedom and rights of the people. In the manorial villages you had lords who owned large portions of land. The vassals who entered into a military obligation with the lords, in exchange for land and protection. Finally, serfs who were a class of people that worked their lord’s land as half slave and half freeman. Vassals were more of an employee and the serfs were little more than a slave because they were bound to the lord’s land. The serfs could not leave or do anything without the lord’s permission and most of the time they had to pay fees to be granted the permissions they requested. In contrast the townspeople elected their officials, had freedom to choose a careers, they move about where they liked, and could acquire training and schooling. Townspeople were in fact free and not absolutely controlled by a lord. As for the manorial villages, the lords had all the power and had absolute control over all the actions and work of the vassals and serfs.
Using natural phenomenon as a starting point for abstraction, Mark Grotjahn’s paintings straddle the polarities of artifice and nature. His painting, Lavender Butterfly Jacaranda over Green (Fig. 2), expresses his fascination with nature. Transferring the experience of observation to an intrigue of creative possibility, Grotjahn harnesses the mysticism of nature through aesthetic formality.
Humanity is but a facet of the sublime macrocosm that is the world’s landscapes. In the relationship between man and landscape, nature is perpetually authoritarian. In her free-verse poems, The Hawthorn Hedge, (1945) and Flame-Tree in a Quarry (1949), Judith Wright illustrates the how refusal to engage with this environment is detrimental to one’s sense of self, and the relentless endurance of the Australian landscape. This overwhelming force of nature is mirrored in JMW Turner’s Romantic artwork, Fishermen at Sea (1796). Both Wright and Turner utilise their respective texts to allegorise the unequal relationship between people and the unforgiving landscape.
In Nature & Landscape: An Introduction to Environmental Aesthetics, Allen Carlson proposes that scientific knowledge can enhance our aesthetic appreciation of the natural world. He draws a connection between technical know-how used in the context of natural landscapes and art history or criticism in the context of conventional art forms. In either case, the viewer would find relatively more meaningful experiences of aesthetic appreciation than if one looked at a painting or landscape without any prior knowledge about it. Carlson endorses this point within his larger Natural Environmental Model, which asserts that though the environment is not entirely of our creation, it does not mean that we have to approach it without any prior understanding.