Reaction to Gilane Tawadros':
Women and Creativity Lecture on November 26th
"Occupy"
Women and Creativity Lecture on November 26th
"Occupy"
Piece by Katey-Ann Hurley
I have to say I feel extremely lucky and privileged to have been able to sit
in the talk with Gilane Tawadros. It was certainly my favorite talk that we’ve had so far
and I was so happy to be given the opportunity to gain insight from such an intelligent
woman in the arts. The pieces that she showed us were all beautiful in their own way, and
they tied together in such a subtle manner that I was astounded by how they resonated
within all of us. I especially loved the pieces by the artist Shen Yuan as well as her words
regarding her own pieces. The topics we discussed: discourse, boundaries, the
complexities of speech, and being a prisoner of your own language intrigued and inspired
me. These are paradoxes that I often mull over in my own bewilderment and it was
relieving to finally be able to put reflections into words and bounce my thoughts off of
Gilane as well as my peers. It goes without saying that the pieces of art that she shared
connected so powerfully within all of us. I was captivated by each and every work, and
furthermore enthralled by what Gilane had to say about her interpretations of the pieces.
It made me think about things in numerous different ways all at once and also reflect on
my own experiences with some of the issues represented within the works. Gilane
Tawadros’ presentation opened my mind to many new ideas, and I am grateful for the
experience.
Piece by Kara Hushon
"We buy things we don't need, with money we don't have, to impress people we don't like"
I loved this quote that Gilane
Tawadros showed us. It was painted on a sign outside of
Documenta 13 in Kassel, Germany, which had some of the
world's wealthiest art connoisseurs attending. In my
opinion, this is everything that is wrong with our
society. But then we realize that it isn't just a
problem with Americans since this idea was displayed in
Germany as well. To me, this displays the ideas of not
really thinking for yourself and simply keeping in line
with social norms and what is expected of you. Just like
in class, someone asked Gilane what one of the paintings
was supposed to mean or represent
and she responded with something like, "I don't know, I'm
in the same boat as you, what do you think it means?" That
was a tough concept for us to grasp because we are so used
to being told what each and every thing means and what is
right or wrong. I often find myself thinking one thing
about a piece and then someone else says that they think
something completely different so I automatically assume
that I am wrong. Which always makes it hard to voice my
thoughts about works of art. Like with many of the works
that Gilane shows us, not once was my first thought about
the things she mentioned, like language and it's barriers,
which I found very interesting. As someone who is trying
to become fluent in Spanish, I often think about language
and the words that get lost in translation, like she spoke
about. I have always been interested in how people learn
languages. You can go from attempting to speak causally in
Spanish class to their entire brain switching over to
Spanish during an exam back to forgetting everything while
trying to speak for an oral portion of an exam then to
almost impeccable Spanish when needed in an emergency. I
was always intrigued by this transition and the words that
are simply untranslatable. The more I think about it the
more I realize how similar that is to art. It's like
seeing the perfect piece of work in your head but then you
just can't get the concrete product right, the feelings
you felt about the work are simply not portrayed to the
viewers or when you just can't describe why you are doing
a piece. Mastering both language and art is time
consuming, tedious and requires dedication.
Piece by Elena J.
Georgopoulos
Gilane was quite interesting. She
speaks exactly how one
would expect someone constantly surrounded by art would
speak-poised, formal,
receptive to new interpretations but fully organized and
coherent when speaking
her own. It was quite enjoyable to listen to her, and the
pieces she showed us
were great.
I think the word “occupy” has
come to mean so much lately.
Occupy obviously brings up the “Occupy Wallstreet” protests,
and others like it
from around the world. In relation to art, occupying space has
always seemed to
be an innate concept of it. All art occupies some sort of
space: a painting
takes place of a blank canvas, a sculpture the place of
unrefined materials, a
blanks piece of paper fills with words and a story forms.
Occupying leads to
creation, because by something new being in a previously
un-occupied space, it
is a creation (or sorts).
It was really impressive to see
and talk about artists that
push the limits of what it meant to occupy space, from
comparing language gaps
to class gaps, both of which create large (figurative) spaces.
Filling in
physical space to represent filling in figurative space?
And/or calling
attention to it? Brilliant.
It makes me think a lot about how
I occupy space, and how I
want to occupy it. I
think about it in a
physical sense- am I happier living in a minimalist style, or
a cluttered one?
Then in the abstract sense-how many lives do I want to be a
part of? What do I
want to make of my abilities? There is just so much to think
about, so much
space to fill. Or, so much space that needs to be emptied. I
have not decided
which is the answer yet. Piece by Cristina Porzio
I
found her presentation to be very interesting. I was surprised to
discover the true meaning behind the art she showed us. Part of what
made it so interesting was discovering what the artist was truly
trying to represent. The ideas that she talked about, such as, art
being able to express things that words cannot or time and the viewer
being an important component of the piece, were really interesting to
me.
When she said that art is able to express things that words
can’t, I suddenly thought about the proverb “a picture is worth a
thousand words”. Wouldn’t this count for art too, or more
specifically the pictures of art pieces she was showing us during the
presentation? Maybe art can express more then what words can, because
it metaphorically consists of more words. Also (if my notes are
correct), Tawadros says that words can’t translate experiences. I
disagree. Words can carry specific emotions that as a result have the
potential to give a precise translation of the experiences.
This type
of strong emotion cannot always be incorporated in the art and that
leaves it to interpretation. For example, the crack in the ground.
Without having the words to explain its meaning, its true significant
was left to the interpretation of viewer, which I am sure would have
not been able to make the right guess at its emotional and powerful
significance.