John Armlender

When speaking about Modernism, John Armlender says, "We think of modernism as being characterized by an obsession with “tomorrow,” but we’re now living in that tomorrow". I really agree with that statement. Back in the early 1900s people still used horses and carriages as a main form of transportation. People either spoke in person or wrote letters. The concept of being able to travel from 1 coast to the next in something that flew in the sky in roughly 6 hours was craziness. We have planes, computers that fit in our pockets, the ability to speak to someone face to face(Skpe) who is living on the other side of the world, cars are the main form of transportation. This is the future that people could only imagine. I think that is really quite amazing; 100 years ago none of these things where even possible. I can only imagine how terrifying it would be to be from the 1900-20s to time travel to 2011. What technology is capable of today is mind blowing. The way that technology changes things are going to be so much different in only ten years from now, let alone another 50 or 100.

I loved that Armlender said, "Most important, I've never believed that what I think about my own
work has anything to do with the work itself". I think that as an artist you need to be aware that what you make is going to have a different effect on people. I think that an artist needs to be unbais about their own work...by not believing your own thoughts towards a piece has anything to do with the piece is the best way to separate yourself from the things you spill your heart and blood into.

Artist have been recycling forms and ideas for centuries. I liked how John Armlender simply put it, "form becomes effective merely because you are reusing". It adds a repetition and emphasis on something that may or may not have been important before; recycling it for your own will tends to make it more significant than it was previously. Art is always recycling itself. I guess I've always known that but it didn't really set in until this year in art history then the idea that art keeps playing on itself, borrowing things from the past, and pulling from other sources for inspiration.

I found it interesting that the only thing in the room of dots that was Armlender's was the dot painted "background" that he placed the found paintings, used dots, on top of. At this point in my life I don't think I would be very interested in doing work like that; who's to say 20 years from now I might be very into that type of thing. I can see myself slowly drifting into liking to work that way. Recently I've been more concerned with art as a process instead of a final product. While reading about the dot paintings I felt that the entire piece was based on research. Armlender had to find and decide what paintings he was going to show and how he would display them all. I liked his process for the final piece.

Precision and vagueness is a dialect that Armlender likes to think and work with. He thought of using and repeating certain objects to create a sense of dejavu. The fact that he repeated light sources was what made everything highly specific; on the other hand the light sources changed dramatically that the fact that they were so specific it became vague. I've thought about whether or not I work in that manner or not. While thinking about this, I don't think I work like this all the time but on occasion it happens. I never said to myself,"Hey, I'm going to make this thing very specific but because of how specific things are its going to end up being mudvayne". I think it just kinda comes, that's why I really liked Armlender's thought,"  Whenever you look at anything, it’s always with a mixture of vagueness and precision, especially if you’re talking about art." It reinforces how I think it's just always there. Leaves are very detailed and individual, but 1000s of leaves on a tree loose that specificity.

I don't believe in explaining things to an audience. I think it's the artworks job to communicate it to the viewers itself; if the art cannot speak for itself it wasn't executed well. I think that art is more interesting that way. If you throw all the answers out, nothing is left to question or up to interpretation.

I think John Armlender's way of going about making art is honest. I think its the only thing that matters is in making art is to make it for yourself. I think what Armlender was getting at was that he was remaining honest to himself while making art. I also think that creating things that everyone can enjoy is important. You want the smartest person and the dumbest person in the room to be able to view it and have some type of understanding.