Visual Art

The visual arts are art forms that create works which are primarily visual in nature, such as ceramics, drawing, painting, sculpture, architecture, printmaking, modern visual arts (photography, video, and filmmaking), design and crafts. These definitions should not be taken too strictly as many artistic disciplines (performing arts, conceptual art, textile arts) involve aspects of the visual arts as well as arts of other types. Also included within the visual arts are the applied arts such as industrial design, graphic design, fashion design, interior design and decorative art.

About Me

My photo
Creative Designer,Primeworks Studio, Media Prima Berhad / B.A Hons Fineart University Technology MARA,Malaysia

Tuesday, June 30, 2009

Art Exhibition at Cemeti House,Indonesia

Pameran Tunggal Handiwirman Saputra
27 Juni - 18 Juli 2009
Objects, Installation and Paintings
Handiwirman Saputra

Dalam tampak luar" silicon rubber dan cat akrilik, 30 x 30 x 10 cm, 2009

Deklarasi Estetik Ala Handiwirman

(Pameran Seni Rupa karya Handiwirman
27 Juni sampai dengan 15 Juli 2009)

Kurator : Asmudjo Jono Irianto

Mengusung kembali pergulatan artistik karya-karya Handiwirman ke Rumah Seni Cemeti, harus kita mulai dengan meneropong jauh ke belakang, kembali ke pameran tunggalnya bertajuk ‘Broken Heart’ - Desember 2002 lalu. Pagelaran tunggal dengan individualitas yang kuat, menebarkan aura inovatif yang segar, dan menjanjikan kepeloporan statement baru bagi seni rupa ‘object’.
‘Broken Heart’ Handiwirman kala itu merupakan deklarasi estetik, yang telah dengan jitu membongkar ulang pemahaman tradisi kriya, sekaligus menjadi tonggak kepeloporan statement seni rupa ‘object’ dalam wacana seni rupa Indonesia kontemporer.
Satu hal kongkrit yang selalu menonjol pada puluhan ‘object’ Handi kala itu,
adalah estetis.
Rekonstruksi tradisi kriya ala Handi tidak dilakukan dengan mengisi, menghias atau apalagi dengan mengolah dan menerapkan patron. Handi bermain dengan benda sebagai bahan, dan bahan sebagai semacam benda. Handi jelas tidak mendesain / merancang namun menggugat persepsi sosial benda dan bahan. Handi memprovokasi logika materialistik dan fetis. Merusak sekaligus menggandakan utilitas.
Dengan jujur benda-benda itu dikembalikan pada kodrat dasar bahannya, mendekatkan mereka pada proporsi dan intimitas keseimbangan gestur tubuh manusia, membongkar dan mengkonstruksi ulang logika-logika penyejajaran, pemaduan dan pembalikan serta perlawanan.
Dalam perkembangan yang radikal Handi acapkali menutup bahkan menyudahi pergulatan artistik bahan dan kebendaannya dengan mencampakkan ‘permainan’ ini jauh ke belakang, ke dalam jenjang revitalisasi tradisi modernisme : dengan melukis ‘still life’ seluruh permainannya.
Kini, mencermati sekilas, mempergunakan perspektif kesuburan eksplorasi dan ‘perayaan’ senirupa ‘object’, yang lagi getol diikuti bersama oleh puluhan perupa segenerasi, maka kepeloporan Handiwirman dalam deklarasi estetik ‘object’ di sini kabur! ‘Pengikut-pengikut Handi’, ramai-ramai menebarkan aksi produksi/reproduksi masal; dengan menjiplak ulang persepsi sosial kebendaan yang telah ada, ’set back’ kembali menuju semangat mengisi dan menghias belaka!
Industri Massal dengan ‘sovenirisasi’ benda-benda keseharian melalui pengerdilan ukuran-ukuran yang digantung bersama kunci motor, mobil dan handphone bermerk.

Di dalam politik senirupa sebaliknya, yang pernah tampil dengan gagasan menggelembungkan ukuran-ukuran benda tiruan sehari-hari tersebut secara ekstrim, telah dilakukan oleh Claes Olddenburg tahun 1970, perupa Amerika kelahiran Swedia yang terkenal dengan karya ‘public installation’nya.
Karya-karya Handiwirman yang baru, di tengah-tengah seakan-akan arus ‘set back’ gelombang produksi ini digelar di Rumah Seni Cemeti bulan Juni 2009. Rumah Seni Cemeti mengetengahkan Asmudjo Jono Irianto, sebagai analis yang suka-suka mendampingi dan menjadi partner ‘ngobrol’ uji coba pemikiran karya-karya Handiwirman.

Handiwirman, lahir di Bukittinggi Sumatra tahun 1975. Masuk ke pendidikan Seni Rupa Jurusan Seni Kriya ISI Yogyakarta dan aktif menjadi seniman perupa sejak itu.

Nindityo Adipurnomo 2009


Pliny the Elder and ancient precedents

The earliest surviving writing on art that can be classified as art history are the passages in Pliny the Elder's Natural History concerning the development of Greek sculpture and painting. From them it is possible to trace the ideas of Xenokrates of Sicyon, a Greek sculptor who was perhaps the first art historian. Pliny's work, while mainly an encyclopaedia of the sciences, has thus been influential from theRenaissance onwards. (Passages about techniques used by the painter Apelles have been especially well-known.) Similar, though independent, developments occurred in 6th century China, where a canon of worthy artists was established by writers in the scholar-official class. These writers, being necessarily proficient in calligraphy, were artists themselves. The artists are described in the Six Principles of Painting formulated by Xie He.

Vasari and artists' biographies

While personal reminiscences of art and artists have long been written and read (see Lorenzo Ghiberti for the best early example), it was Giorgio Vasari, the Tuscan painter, sculptor and author of the Lives of the Painters, who wrote the first true history of art. He emphasized art's progression and development, which was a milestone in this field. His was a personal and a historical account, featuring biographies of individual Italian artists, many of whom were his contemporaries and personal acquaintances. The most renowned of these was Michelangelo, and Vasari's account is enlightening, though biased in places. Vasari's ideas about art held sway until the 18th century, when criticism was leveled at his biographical account of history.

Winckelmann and art criticism

Scholars such as Johann Joachim Winckelmann (1717-1768), criticised Vasari's "cult" of artistic personality, and they argued that the real emphasis in the study of art should be the views of the learned beholder and not the unique viewpoint of the charismatic artist. Winckelmann's writings thus were the beginnings of art criticism. Winckelmann critiqued the artistic excesses of Baroque and Rococo forms, and was instrumental in reforming taste in favor of the more sober Neoclassicism. Jacob Burckhardt (1818 - 1897), one of the founders of art history, noted that Winckelmann was 'the first to distinguish between the periods of ancient art and to link the history of style with world history'. From Winckelmann until the mid-20th century, the field of art history was dominated by German-speaking academics. Winckelmann's work thus marked the entry of art history into the high-philosophical discourse of German culture.
Winckelmann was read avidly by Johann Wolfgang Goethe and Friedrich Schiller, both of whom began to write on the history of art, and his account of the Laocoon occasioned a response by Lessing. The emergence of art as a major subject of philosophical speculation was solidified by the appearance of Immanuel Kant's Critique of Judgment in 1790, and was furthered by Hegel's Lectures on Aesthetics. Hegel's philosophy served as the direct inspiration for Karl Schnaase's work. Schnaase's Niederländische Briefe established the theoretical foundations for art history as an autonomous discipline, and his Geschichte der bildenden Künste, one of the first historical surveys of the history of art from antiquity to the Renaissance, facilitated the teaching of art history in German-speaking universities. Schnaase's survey was published contemporaneously with a similar work by Franz Theodor Kugler.

Wölfflin and stylistic analysis

Heinrich Wölfflin (1864-1945), who studied under Burckhardt in Basel, is the "father" of modern art history. Wölfflin taught at the universities of Berlin, Basel, Munich, and Zurich. A number of students went on to distinguished careers in art history, including Jakob Rosenberg and Frida Schottmuller. He introduced a scientific approach to the history of art, focusing on three concepts. Firstly, he attempted to study art using psychology, particularly by applying the work of Wilhelm Wundt. He argued, among other things, that art and architecture are good if they resemble the human body. For example, houses were good if their façades looked like faces. Secondly, he introduced the idea of studying art through comparison. By comparing individual paintings to each other, he was able to make distinctions of style. His book Renaissance and Baroque developed this idea, and was the first to show how these stylistic periods differed from one another. In contrast to Giorgio Vasari, Wölfflin was uninterested in the biographies of artists. In fact he proposed the creation of an "art history without names." Finally, he studied art based on ideas of nationhood. He was particularly interested in whether there was an inherently "Italian" and an inherently "German" style. This last interest was most fully articulated in his monograph on the German artist Albrecht Dürer.

Panofsky and iconography

Today's understanding of the symbolic content of art comes from a group of scholars who gathered in Hamburg in the 1920s. The most prominent among them were Erwin Panofsky, Aby Warburg, and Fritz Saxl. Together they developed much of the vocabulary that continues to be used in the 21st century by art historians. "Iconography"--with roots meaning "symbols from writing" refers to subject matter n art derived from written sources--especially scripture and mythology. "Iconology" is a broader term that referred to all symbolism, whether derived from a specific text or not. Today art historians sometimes use these terms interchangeably.Panofsky, in his early work, also developed the theories of Riegl, but became eventually more preoccupied with iconography, and in particular with the transmission of themes related to classical antiquity in the Middle Ages and Renaissance. In this respect his interests coincided with those of Warburg, the son of a wealthy family who had assembled an impressive library in Hamburg devoted to the study of the classical tradition in later art and culture. Under Saxl's auspices, this library was developed into a research institute, affiliated with the University of Hamburg, where Panofsky taught.
Warburg died in 1929, and in the 1930s Saxl and Panofsky, both Jewish, were forced to leave Hamburg. Saxl settled in London, bringing Warburg's library with him and establishing the Warburg Institute. Panofsky settled in Princeton at the Institute for Advanced Study. In this respect they were part of an extraordinary influx of German art historians into the English-speaking academy in the 1930s. These scholars were largely responsible for establishing art history as a legitimate field of study in the English-speaking world, and the influence of Panofsky's methodology, in particular, determined the course of American art history for a generation.

Marx and ideology

During the mid-20th century art historians embraced social history by using critical approaches. The goal is to show how art interacts with power structures in society. One critical approach that art historians used was Marxism. Marxist art history attempted to show how art was tied to specific classes, how images contain information about the economy, and how images can make the status quo seem natural (ideology). Perhaps the best-known Marxist was Clement Greenberg, who came to prominence during the late 1930s with his essay "Avant-Garde and Kitsch".[6]In the essay Greenberg claimed that the avant-garde arose in order to defend aesthetic standards from the decline of taste involved in consumer society, and seeing kitsch and art as opposites. Greenberg further claimed that avant-garde and Modernist art was a means to resist the leveling of culture produced by capitalist propaganda. Greenberg appropriated the German word 'kitsch' to describe this consumerism, though its connotations have since changed to a more affirmative notion of left-over materials of capitalist culture. Greenberg later became well-known for examining the formal properties of modern art.
Meyer Schapiro is one of the best-remembered Marxist art historians of the mid-20th century. Although he wrote about numerous time periods and themes in art, he is best remembered for his commentary on sculpture from the late Middle Ages and early Renaissance, at which time he saw evidence of capitalism emerging and feudalism declining. Arnold Hauser wrote the first Marxist survey of Western Art, titled The Social History of Art. In this book he attempted to show how class consciousness was reflected in major art periods. His book was controversial when published during the 1950s because it makes generalizations about entire eras, a strategy now called "vulgar Marxism". T.J. Clark was the first art historian writing from a Marxist perspective to abandon vulgar Marxism. He wrote Marxist art histories of several impressionist and realist artists, including Gustave Courbet and Édouard Manet. These books focused closely on the political and economic climates in which the art was created.