Hey guys. First I wanted to apologize for the late post tonight - I spent most of the weekend shooting for some whale-watching cruisetours in digby county..exciting stuff, but too detached from class for my liking.
Anyway. This course has rekindled my love of art nouveau, particularly in print form. Through that love, several years ago I became familiar with the work of Nigel Weymouth and Michael English, who together were known as "hapshash and the coloured coat". They're known for art nouveau-inspired psychedelic rock posters of the 60's, but until taking this course, and, particularly, reading Guffey's chapter on the 1960's reccurence of the art nouveau aesthetic, I became more interested in what the appropriation of the older style came to symbolize for the now infamous hippy generation. What connections can we draw between the idealizations of the art nouveau and art frisco movement, as this later "movement" is known? How can we see our society's acceptance of technology, well cemented by the 60's, reflected in the meaning imbedded in later iterations of similar "styles"? Where does psychology and sociology come to play in this work?


My three examples of work are as follows. First, a poster by Alphonse Mucha, considered the pinnacle of printed art nouveau matter. Mucha was somewhat of a hermit to the 'fad' of art nouveau; he believed his art to have a simpler, spiritual origin rather than being a perfect and beautiful mixture of technologically advanced technique and organically based ornament. I believe his belief of artistic origin is fascinating when translated to the movements later recurrence.


Questions? Ideas? Comments? :)
All good and rich material. I think the phenomenon of the way an artifact can become less associated with 'technology' and the technological worls--even if it is a mass produced, mechanically-made thing-- endlessly fascinating.
ReplyDeleteDoes the artifact get liberated from context?
Are we alienated from its conditions of production?
Where do we locate agency?