Hope this is the right place to put this. If it is, apologies. Feel free to move it to Art Discussion. [EDIT] In retrospect, that seems the folder for it. Sorry
Basically this is a call to the collective knowledge base of the internet.
If you are aware of any academic journals that deal with the above topics, could you drop me a link?
Obviously concept art is not something you write about, you gotta dig deeper into illustration; and even further into theory and history of art and the aesthetic theory.
Any help would be welcome. Cheers
Here's a doodle, to appease the "we want to see art dammit!" folk.
Good lord, I hope not.
**Finished Work Thread **Process Thread **Edges Tutorial
Crash Course for Artists, Illustrators, and Cartoonists, NYC, the 2013 Edition!
"Work is more fun than fun."
"Art is supposed to punch you in the brain, and it's supposed to stay punched."
If they're not here they are coming. I was asked to contribute to one. I know they are out there and as an, cough cough, academic I should know about them but I just have a mental block about academic journals after over 20 years of dealing with them and colleagues.
I understand completely where you're coming from. I'm reading through the "Marxsit Theory of Art" (A british journal of aesthetics article) and really see no practical application of it. At least in the field I'm studying.
Seems that art theory is awesome, in theory, but practically... well, useless. But maybe it's my ignorance speaking. I have to dig deeper.
My other thought is that you list four very different arenas within visual art...very different...and when one just says "painting"...well, that's as wide open as it gets.
But yeah, there's tons of interesting stuff to read on art...I would recommend a visit to a few used bookstores...you get far more variety than just what is currently published. Entire publishing lines are dedicated to analysis of various art movements, periods and artists.
A good starting point would be the website academia.edu. A search for each of your topics will bring up a list of links to authors and their publications, so you can quickly find out which journals they are publishing in e.g.
That's brilliant. Thanks guys. I understand that illustration is different from design, and both can involve a bit of painting. I just didn't word the question right, I guess.
Basically this year I'm writing dissertation on "cultural context in visual development of adaptations", so looking at things like Alice Madness Returns to see how they achieved this feeling of place. We imidiately know that it's located in London, don't we? Would the game be very different visually if it was set in Russia for example? So the lecturer suggested I look at things like architecture, art movements in various countries, etc.
Briggsy, thanks for that link! I'm looking at it right now
Jeff, I understand completely that academic side of art is pretty much useless in practical scenario. However I don't ask for the sake of asking here. It's for... science!
Hey hey Thoolhoo
I know there are some out there written by artists for artists. A surprising number of art graduates have received their doctorate and write while they make art now. Arts journals tend to be published 6 monthly or yearly in very small runs and they can be hard to get your hands on physically, so online is probably your best resource. Here's a page with a list of those that will hopefully fit the bill. I know Art Journal definitely features academic content.
Aaaand this is an online journal published by the University of Cardiff who have some fantastic professors working there:
Aaand this is more of a magazine but it does feature the occasional academic article worth reading: is http://www.creativereview.co.uk/ ... we always had copies of these littering the faculty when I was studying.
Your question is really really interesting and I wish you luck with your dissertation! I remember writing mine. 30,000 words of HELL. A friend still has nightmares she's going to be late submitting hers years later, so prepare for a stressful time
Oh, and before I forget here's a link!
Wonder and Horror
A tendency to make connections between wildly different times and places was common at this moment. A year before Collages and Objects, in 1953, the ICA hosted an exhibition titled Wonder and Horror of the Human Head, organized by Roland Penrose, which offered a heterogeneous assortment of oil paintings, photographic reproductions, and artifacts from a wide range of ages and cultures, chosen, the catalogue stated, according to the criterion of “emotional content.” The historical breadth of the exhibition hoped to establish continuity and community between different times and places, functioning as proof of past humanity as well as a plea for one to come. In many ways, Wonder and Horror functioned as a precursor to the Museum of Modern Art’s 1955 exhibition The Family of Man, which visited London in 1956, given that both sought to lay out transcendental and unifying claims about man’s nature in the wake of a catastrophic war and under the threat of a seemingly imminent bomb through displays largely consisting of photographic documents. If the New York exhibition nervously aspired toward a feeling of global family, however, a sense of anxious community similarly motivated the London exhibition, albeit in a slightly different sense. As underlined by the wonder and horror in the exhibition’s title, the head signified both the powers of which man was capable as well as the weaknesses to which he was susceptible: “The head is not only man’s most dominating feature, in the physical sense—the seat of his controlling intelligence, the lodgement of his vision and hearing—it is also his most vulnerable feature,” the catalogue explained. The exhibition might be said to have had one foot on either side of the rupture caused by the war; as it looked forward to an economy of information and intelligence, it simultaneously internalized the state of ruin just behind it. The documents on display similarly edged between anxiety and awe, encompassing artifacts from ancient civilizations to the present day, including photographs of Etruscan masks, eighteenth-century Indian sun gods, works of modern art, and contemporary representations culled from popular culture. In many ways, the exhibition modeled itself on André Malraux’s “museum without walls,” with a common feature derived from wildly different objects, except that here the archive of art gave way to the stuff of mass culture. “Contemporary examples in this field are often most vigorous and spontaneous in their popular forms,” Penrose noted in a brochure accompanying the exhibition. “In commercial advertising, the illustrated magazine, and the picture postcard, many of the most ancient symbols appear in a modern guise, and this aspect of the subject is shown in the scrapbook compiled by Lee Miller.”
KeeTwee! You're a friggin' genious! That's exactly what I was looking for
And thanks, I'm sort of looking forward to it in careful aprehension. Should be fun, once it's done and dusted. But yes, a diet of energy drink and nicotine (I smoke) is likely to happen!
Great info thanks for sharing KewTee!!!
Last edited by blogmatix; November 11th, 2012 at 02:50 AM.
My sketchbook thread:
I like the direction this discussion is going into. Blogmatix, like what for example?
To be honest I found it quite difficult to come up with an interesting question that I would want to spend a whole year working on. Currently I'm investigating how the cultural context of a piece is affecting the authentnicity of the piece. In other words, with Eastern and Western cultures being so different, I'm looking at various artists and comparing their methods/styles. But it took a while to get there.
Also it was challenging to make it sound like a legitimate grounds for academic research and move away from the usual "how environment affects character design" kind of stuff the years before us did.
In the first, he noted that in older books on sea fishes, the fish are always illustrated as being washed up on the beach. It made sense, because that was before scuba diving, and that is how people saw fish when they saw them at all: dead specimens on the beach. Then, early in the 19th century, a craze for aquariums swept Europe, and for the first time people could watch living fish through the glass of an aquarium, as if they were under water themselves. And indeed, from then on, guides to fish tended to illustrate the fish as if they were suspended in water instead of washed up. This changed the conception people, even ones without aquariums, had of fish and the aquatic realm. They began to see the ocean as something "real" instead of something utterly alien and even threatening.
The second example tracked the evolution of some cartoon figures. The essay was actually about how immature mammals are similar across many species: human babies, and indeed in most mammal babies, have large, rounded heads and large eyes. We tend to experience that as "cute" and feel well-disposed towards such creatures. It may well be an evolved trait, and it works not just for human babies: our domestic animals often display similar characteristics, which probably evolved because when humans first domestic animals like dogs, the ones with these traits would appeal the most to their owners and thus they would be most likely to be selected for breeding.
Gould then showed how some cartoon figures, such as Mickey Mouse, underwent an evolution: as time went on, Disney drew Mickey with an ever more rounded head and larger eyes, making the character look ever more child-like, and Mickey's personality also turned from slightly evil to merely mischievous in a childlike way. It was not just Mickey either; you can see this same phenomenon in many comic book characters. Asterix and Obelix come to mind, and I have even seen it to some extent in the characters from Tintin.
Both of these essays struck me as being far more interesting than ones by learned art professors that go on and on about the "deeper meaning" of this or that painting.
My sketchbook thread: