I have been reading the catalogue of the Joan Eardley Sense of Place exhibition. It says she was classified as a social realist, as her work was of the 'kitchen sink' school. I need to read more about what Social Realism means. She, however, was quite dismissive of the term, more or less saying, 'I paint how I paint, classification is of no interest to me'. Maybe this Social Realist categorisation is why I like her work - gritty, mundane, with no artificial prettifying. I loved her drawings of children - energetic, scruffy, dirty, maybe cross-eyed, with a joie de vivre about them.
Thinking more about this, made me think about Social Mobility, which is so plugged by our Governments. And which I think is a load of tosh. I was at uni, as a mature student, from 2009-14. I grew hugely as a person, because I worked hard for my degree … but it made not the slightest difference to my social position. Neither did I want it to. My social mobility movements had been made by my working life in a manual industry, and led to me being, by my standards, quite affluent, and able to retire at 48. However, many of the young people on my degree course, did not study very hard, and are, at 21+, employed now in service industry jobs which they could have started at age 16. University education which was promoted as the key to social mobility has been an expensive blind alley for many people.
I think my artwork could create a new category - Social Respect. I am interested in what people do, that is valuable. Not in monetary terms, but in behaviour. I need to think more about how I want to define this.
I also thought about my sampler design. I was thinking about the cutting remark and examples of them. I had been envisaging lots of little stitch bits (like Tilleke Schwartz) but considered a series of simple two person outline for each time I have supported someone being treated unfairly, along with a quote.
Bhuta and me 'You are not giving him a warning without doing a fact finding"
Alex and me 'It is illegal to only downgrade female part-time staff with care responsibilities "
L and me 'You cannot be made compulsorily redundant when the job still exists'
Anita and me 'You cannot be dismissed for clerical errors when training has been refused'.
And an idea to write up tomorrow - research is sometimes more informative when it does not go right. I went to A Modern Portrait at SNPG and my data collection was naff because I did not understand their definitions of Achievement, Celebrity, Society and New Art Movements. So my counting was duff. But when I reevaluated using my Value criteria, it went well. Delve into this.
Saturday, 31 December 2016
Wednesday, 28 December 2016
Joan Eardley - A Sense of Place at Scottish Gallery of Modern Art
Jim and I are in Edinburgh for a few days. The Joan Eardley exhibition was excellent. She worked in two main fields - tenements and people in Glasgow Townhead (a deprived slum); and landscape at Catterline, a largely depopulated fishing village of about 13 dwellings just south of Aberdeen. Both sets of circumstances had similarities - a resilient population that made the best of a hard living.
I looked at both sets of paintings and enjoyed them, but decided to only analyse the images of people. Her earlier works of people in Townhead were heavy and sombre - interior scenes with a range and a man (a fellow artist) smoking. But her later works, mostly of children, were delightful. These were often quick chalk sketches of tenement children - energetic, colourful, very gestural. I liked the way she had captured an attitude or a posture - Eardley would give them comics or paint and paper to occupy them whilst she drew them. She was known in her area, and the children would often come up the stairs to her studio and ask if she wanted to paint them. Apparently she would pay them 3d, or 6d for a long 45 minute pose, and they would rush off to spend it on sweeties! There was a local family, the Samsons, with 12 children who she got to know quite well. I loved the drawing of the red headed girl with a pronounced squint.
The landscapes were often large and gestural oils, boldly coloured and included sand, grit and grass/wheat seeds. There were several preparatory sketches, in chalks, worked on smaller pieces of paper, with additional paper stuck to the rear when she needed to extend the drawing in a particular direction. I often liked the preparatory drawings more.
Her eye was said to be "keen, but kind". I liked this quote.
I looked at both sets of paintings and enjoyed them, but decided to only analyse the images of people. Her earlier works of people in Townhead were heavy and sombre - interior scenes with a range and a man (a fellow artist) smoking. But her later works, mostly of children, were delightful. These were often quick chalk sketches of tenement children - energetic, colourful, very gestural. I liked the way she had captured an attitude or a posture - Eardley would give them comics or paint and paper to occupy them whilst she drew them. She was known in her area, and the children would often come up the stairs to her studio and ask if she wanted to paint them. Apparently she would pay them 3d, or 6d for a long 45 minute pose, and they would rush off to spend it on sweeties! There was a local family, the Samsons, with 12 children who she got to know quite well. I loved the drawing of the red headed girl with a pronounced squint.
The landscapes were often large and gestural oils, boldly coloured and included sand, grit and grass/wheat seeds. There were several preparatory sketches, in chalks, worked on smaller pieces of paper, with additional paper stuck to the rear when she needed to extend the drawing in a particular direction. I often liked the preparatory drawings more.
Her eye was said to be "keen, but kind". I liked this quote.
Sunday, 25 December 2016
Working out my sampler design
I needed to work out how to plan the stitching on the sampler. Time to take it off the stand, unroll it from the frame and get a scale image so I could work out the design. I have been doing rubbings at art class recently - what better way to get a scale drawing?!
 |
| Sampler unrolled showing stitching to date |
 |
| Rubbing of sampler |
 |
| Rubbing of hand drawn, stitched, map of Australia |
 |
| Rubbing of alphabet, borders and woman pushing boundaries |
Wednesday, 21 December 2016
Tuesday, 20 December 2016
Compare and Contrast Freud and Sir John Soane Musuems
Similarities
Both originally a family home.
Both are named after men - Freud and Soane
Both represent women in some way
Neither have the representation of gender as a key principle
Plentiful staff at both locations.
Differences
Each from a different time - Freud 20th C, Soane 18th C
Women are peripheral to the representation within the Soane Museum, but are central to representation in the Freud
Soane is a 'Gentleman's collection' of disparate objects of whatever interested him at the time - paintings, architectural details, maps/plans, coins, etc. Freud has a diversity of objects, which all relate to the theme of psychoanalysis in some way - books, archaeological human forms, furniture, personal paraphernalia.
Soane has some Museum policies available on line. Freud does not.
Soane has portrait of Emma Hamilton, by Sir Joshua Reynolds in a coquettish semi-nude pose. Freud's wall image is of Gravida, fully clothed.
Soane is free to enter, and has information explaining the house available in a 3GBP booklet. Very little narrative available about house contents. Freud is 4GBP (annual ticket) and has information boards around the house. Plenty of narrative available about the people it represents
Soane forbids photos. Freud allows photos, but requests no flash.
Preparation for visits.
Select my two museums - Sir John Soane and Freud. Identify opening times.
Identify questions to ask: How do these museums show their respect for women?
What does 'respect' mean? To me - treating people positively. Not derogative.
Methodology - qualitatitive
Scopophilia - pleasure of looking. In relation to my question.
How analysed - by considering why one museum, Soane, did not appeal to me and the other one, Freud, did.
Theory applied - semiotics - visual reading of the sign. I considered whether semiotics holds true over time or does the interpretation of the sign vary across time.
Reynolds' portrait of The Snake in the Grass (Emma Hamilton) would have been read semiotically by a small audience of affluent men, probably in a rich man's study, in a private environment. It is an image intended to be titillating, and would not have been on display in the public areas of a house, where the mistress and her guests could see it. It would not have been interpreted as objectifying women, but possibly personifying woman as alluring. However over time, the nude striking a pose, has been interpreted in various ways, and gone in and out of fashion for collectors and for display. In 21st century Britain, feminists would find it demeaning and objectifying to women.
Gravida, Freud's plaster cast wall hanging, if clearly named, would have been interpreted as a fertile woman in ancient Greek times, and probably also in Freud's time. My interpretation of the image, without knowledge of the meaning of the name, was to interpret it as a Greco-woman in a flowing robe - with no concept of its representation of fertility. So semiotics again does not give a consistent representation of a sign.
Lambrous Malafouris' Material Engagement Theory alters the nature of the sign. It is the engagement with materiality that informs understanding. The materiality of the object means it has tactility and durability - unlike and separate from a linguistic, i.e. ephemeral, sign. Semiotics relies on coding and decoding- understanding what it is, and what it means. However the interaction between material and linguistic signs enables semiotics to work. Material signs are durable - they can be touched, carried, worn, possessed, traded and destroyed. They are tactile and spacial and can understood in embodied ways. However, the linguistic sign is ephemeral, linear and sequential and does not have the properties of the material sign. Traditional semiotics tends to reduce signification to a contextual encoding and decoding, where there is a specific 'right answer' to decoding the signifier.
Material engagement theory changes this outcome. Material signs are not message carriers of the pre-defined social universe: they are an example of "something". They are objects of substance, so form instantiation (an instance). Without the linguistic sign to accompany the object, there is no expressive concept. Viewing the sign without understanding the concept or code, means the interpretation will vary across time.
Both originally a family home.
Both are named after men - Freud and Soane
Both represent women in some way
Neither have the representation of gender as a key principle
Plentiful staff at both locations.
Differences
Each from a different time - Freud 20th C, Soane 18th C
Women are peripheral to the representation within the Soane Museum, but are central to representation in the Freud
Soane is a 'Gentleman's collection' of disparate objects of whatever interested him at the time - paintings, architectural details, maps/plans, coins, etc. Freud has a diversity of objects, which all relate to the theme of psychoanalysis in some way - books, archaeological human forms, furniture, personal paraphernalia.
Soane has some Museum policies available on line. Freud does not.
Soane has portrait of Emma Hamilton, by Sir Joshua Reynolds in a coquettish semi-nude pose. Freud's wall image is of Gravida, fully clothed.
Soane is free to enter, and has information explaining the house available in a 3GBP booklet. Very little narrative available about house contents. Freud is 4GBP (annual ticket) and has information boards around the house. Plenty of narrative available about the people it represents
Soane forbids photos. Freud allows photos, but requests no flash.
Preparation for visits.
Select my two museums - Sir John Soane and Freud. Identify opening times.
Identify questions to ask: How do these museums show their respect for women?
What does 'respect' mean? To me - treating people positively. Not derogative.
Chambers dictionary - Respect: to heed; to relate to; to treat with consideration; refrain from violating; to feel to show esteem; deference or honour to; value. Interesting that respect includes Value!
Scopophilia - pleasure of looking. In relation to my question.
How analysed - by considering why one museum, Soane, did not appeal to me and the other one, Freud, did.
Theory applied - semiotics - visual reading of the sign. I considered whether semiotics holds true over time or does the interpretation of the sign vary across time.
Reynolds' portrait of The Snake in the Grass (Emma Hamilton) would have been read semiotically by a small audience of affluent men, probably in a rich man's study, in a private environment. It is an image intended to be titillating, and would not have been on display in the public areas of a house, where the mistress and her guests could see it. It would not have been interpreted as objectifying women, but possibly personifying woman as alluring. However over time, the nude striking a pose, has been interpreted in various ways, and gone in and out of fashion for collectors and for display. In 21st century Britain, feminists would find it demeaning and objectifying to women.
Gravida, Freud's plaster cast wall hanging, if clearly named, would have been interpreted as a fertile woman in ancient Greek times, and probably also in Freud's time. My interpretation of the image, without knowledge of the meaning of the name, was to interpret it as a Greco-woman in a flowing robe - with no concept of its representation of fertility. So semiotics again does not give a consistent representation of a sign.
Lambrous Malafouris' Material Engagement Theory alters the nature of the sign. It is the engagement with materiality that informs understanding. The materiality of the object means it has tactility and durability - unlike and separate from a linguistic, i.e. ephemeral, sign. Semiotics relies on coding and decoding- understanding what it is, and what it means. However the interaction between material and linguistic signs enables semiotics to work. Material signs are durable - they can be touched, carried, worn, possessed, traded and destroyed. They are tactile and spacial and can understood in embodied ways. However, the linguistic sign is ephemeral, linear and sequential and does not have the properties of the material sign. Traditional semiotics tends to reduce signification to a contextual encoding and decoding, where there is a specific 'right answer' to decoding the signifier.
Material engagement theory changes this outcome. Material signs are not message carriers of the pre-defined social universe: they are an example of "something". They are objects of substance, so form instantiation (an instance). Without the linguistic sign to accompany the object, there is no expressive concept. Viewing the sign without understanding the concept or code, means the interpretation will vary across time.
Sunday, 18 December 2016
Methodology Exercise
We have been set an exercise to set some methodology, and use it to compare and contrast two museums. We can choose between: Dennis Sever's House; Camden Arts Centre; Sir John Soane, and Freud House. Dennis Sever's House is fully booked until the New Year, costs 15GBP, and I have already been there. We went as a class to Camden Arts Centre (free entry) and it left me cold. However, I have never been to Sir John Soane (free entry) or Freud's House (4GBP student entry, ticket valid for a year), so I decided to pick these two, largely because they were originally private homes.
My preparation:
Define a reason for selecting these two - both originally private homes.
Identify questions to consider while going round the property.:
How do these museums show their respect for women?
By their artefacts?
By their staging?
By the narrative provided?
By their policies?
By how they treat their customers?
How do they target their marketing?
What does 'respect' mean? To me - treating people positively. Not derogative.
Chambers dictionary - Respect: to heed; to relate to; to treat with consideration; refrain from violating; to feel to show esteem; deference or honour to; value. Interesting that respect includes Value!
I had a look at the policies that each museum published on its webpage. The Sir John Soane had a few policies available, and the Collections Policy made it clear that very few artefacts were accepted by the museum. They had a Committee that applied very strong criteria around period and subject matter before they accepted anything from the public for the museum. I noted Sir John Soane had 2 sons, and no mention of any wife or daughters. Nothing specifically about women. I was not looking forward to going to this museum, as class members from a previous study group had reviewed it and not had a favourable time there. NB Photos not allowed.
The Freud Museum had very few policies on its web page, but was much more informative about Anna Freud, his daughter. I did not know anyone who had been there, but I was looking forward to the visit, and had meant to visit the location for some time - this exercise just galvanised me into action. Photos allowed, no flash.
The Visits:
The Sir John Soane is a deceptively large house on Lincolns Inn Fields. The entrance appears to be to one house, but actually extends to 3 houses. Sir John Soane left his house and estate to become a museum, on the terms that nothing was to be altered. He had a huge collection of architectural artefacts, maps and plans, and other 18th century bric-a-brac. Very few information boards or handouts, unless you paid for a 3GBP pamphlet or 20GBP guidebook! There are a couple of rooms facing the square which are decorated and styled for the period and feel quite spacious. However, the complex rooms at the rear of the house are absolutely stuffed with a plethora of architectural features, artlessly displayed. One room had walls that were layered with hinged, wall sized panels, and had huge paintings were stored/hung on them, and the museum assistant was moving them so visitors could see the paintings.
Features about women included:
Coins - mostly with male profiles, but a few female as well. If a male and female profile was present, the male was in front.
Oil paintings. Mostly of high class men, but a few women were present. In my opinion the women portrayed were in the role of 'attractive appendage to a man'. Typical of the period in which the painting was made.
Oil painting of Emma Hamilton in a coquettish pose, with a small child.
Firescreen - textile with a faded image of a woman.
Pencil drawing of a woman, with a label in french. I could not translate it, using my basic French.
Ceiling murals of semi-clad women, personifying various graces.
There was a room describing a project 'Opening up the Soane Museum', which had information. The script in the information boards referred to men by job role and name - Curator, John Smith - but Helen Dorey did not have a job role (I later found out she was the Deputy Director).
On a Recognition Board (high on the wall and illuminated), high status staff, both men and women were named and titled. It mentioned there had been turnover of Musuem Directors, leading to deputies covering the role. Lower status staff (Assistant Conservator, Community Outreach Officer, Volunteers and Visitor Assistants were mentioned but not named. Except for "Special thanks due to Lewis Bush, young and upcoming photographer".
In another corner (unilluminated) on a board, Visitor Assistants are named, and photographed, and this shows they are mostly women. Volunteers and visitor assistants were plentiful at the venue, with an approximate ratio of 4 women:1man. No way of telling who was paid/volunteering.
Analysis:
I was too tired and uninspired/disinterested to carry out quantitative analysis by counting objects. So I looked at things, made notes and concentrated on how I felt - qualitative analysis. Then I thought about semiotics - how we read signs. Semiotics is a useful theory, but has a major criticism made of it - that the theory says the meaning of signs is static - which it is not. As culture evolves, things we see change in how they are interpreted. For example, a lady in the late 1800s is often portrayed in drama, wearing a strident purple - which we now read as Victorian, and fairly ordinary. In its time, the colour of the dress indicated she was high status because purple was one of the first Perkins artificial dyes derived from a by-product of the coal tar industry, was a recent textile invention for its time, and only worn by high fashion, affluent ladies.
So, the policy of the Sir John Soane, to retain the museum as he left it, is impacting on how the building, contents and artefacts can be interpreted and understood in 21st century society. It comes across neither as a museum, nor a personal home.
Coins embossed with the head of a monarch, in profile, indicate status. It is disrespectful for a low status person to look a high status person in the eye, so coins only show high status people in profile, so the plebs cannot stare them in the eye. But 21st century society does not understand the symbolism of the profile. As the UK has had a female monarch on its coinage for 60+ years, we probably do not realise how unusual it is for a woman to be portrayed on coins.
I found the room about 'Opening up the Soane' much more interesting for analysis of women. There was considerable importance attached to the roles that staff carried out. The Recognition Board appeared to have been written with the Senior Staff (mostly men) as the intended audience, as it recognised and flattered them. One junior team member was mentioned with the senior men, and was male, 'young and upcoming'. The junior staff were referred to, but by job roles only (impossible to identify gender). Volunteers were not named, but had a group photograph (women only!) and were not representative of the people who volunteer.
The Freud Museum
This museum is a large family house in Finchley Road, an affluent area. As we entered, it felt like a family home, built in the early 20th century. It was the home of Sigmund Freud from 1938-9 - only one year! Freud was a non-practicing Jew. Freud and his family fled Austria because of harassment of the Jewish population when it was annexed by the Nazis, immediately prior to the start of WW2. They were able to obtain visas due to his professional status and connections, and migrated as a family, with their furniture and possessions, and considerable funds. They were able to pay various 'fees' by selling about a third of his book collection, and using personal funds. Presumably the Freud family remained sufficiently affluent to also purchase a large house in an expensive area, despite being refugee migrants. Anna Freud was his daughter, who lived in the house until 1982 (her death) and bequeathed it as a Musuem to Freud.
Dining room contained Anna Freud's peasant style furniture from early 1900s. Information boards on the dining table gave a brief life history of Freud, Anna, his wife, 2 housekeepers and a friend of Anna. Strong, positive representation of real people.
The downstairs lounge/study/consulting room is furnished as it was during his time, with lots of archaeological artefacts in glass cabinets. He had many human figures from various archaeological periods which he used in his work. Nora noted the different periods were all jumbled up together. Perhaps there was a different reason for assembling the objects the way they were. There was his consulting couch, with his seat behind the head of the couch, so the patient could not be distracted by seeing him.
Upstairs, on the capacious landing there was an extensive family tree, identifying Sigmund Freud, Anna Freud (daughter and child psychologist) and Lucien (great nephew and artist) and Clement Freud (great nephew and MP/broadcaster) amongst others.
In the rear bedroom, was a display about Anna Freud, a noted child psychologist. There was her desk and typewriter, and a large glass cabinet with various objects related to her - a thimble and the accompanying letter from a friend who donated it; a wooden woodpecker door knocker, typewriter, books etc. The display combined artefacts about her professional life and competence, and her domestic interests such as knitting and sewing. It made for a more rounded presentation of a deceased person.
In a front bedroom there was a consulting couch and table, but little else. The wall space is used for visiting artistic displays. The artworks on display were of black and white drawings in a month-to-a-view calendar format, presumably giving a narrative of what happened to the (male) artist throughout the month. Did not fit with my remit.
However, there were two interaction boards that asked key questions favoured by Freud. I liked the interaction potential of these.
My preparation:
Define a reason for selecting these two - both originally private homes.
Identify questions to consider while going round the property.:
How do these museums show their respect for women?
By their artefacts?
By their staging?
By the narrative provided?
By their policies?
By how they treat their customers?
How do they target their marketing?
What does 'respect' mean? To me - treating people positively. Not derogative.
Chambers dictionary - Respect: to heed; to relate to; to treat with consideration; refrain from violating; to feel to show esteem; deference or honour to; value. Interesting that respect includes Value!
I had a look at the policies that each museum published on its webpage. The Sir John Soane had a few policies available, and the Collections Policy made it clear that very few artefacts were accepted by the museum. They had a Committee that applied very strong criteria around period and subject matter before they accepted anything from the public for the museum. I noted Sir John Soane had 2 sons, and no mention of any wife or daughters. Nothing specifically about women. I was not looking forward to going to this museum, as class members from a previous study group had reviewed it and not had a favourable time there. NB Photos not allowed.
The Freud Museum had very few policies on its web page, but was much more informative about Anna Freud, his daughter. I did not know anyone who had been there, but I was looking forward to the visit, and had meant to visit the location for some time - this exercise just galvanised me into action. Photos allowed, no flash.
The Visits:
The Sir John Soane is a deceptively large house on Lincolns Inn Fields. The entrance appears to be to one house, but actually extends to 3 houses. Sir John Soane left his house and estate to become a museum, on the terms that nothing was to be altered. He had a huge collection of architectural artefacts, maps and plans, and other 18th century bric-a-brac. Very few information boards or handouts, unless you paid for a 3GBP pamphlet or 20GBP guidebook! There are a couple of rooms facing the square which are decorated and styled for the period and feel quite spacious. However, the complex rooms at the rear of the house are absolutely stuffed with a plethora of architectural features, artlessly displayed. One room had walls that were layered with hinged, wall sized panels, and had huge paintings were stored/hung on them, and the museum assistant was moving them so visitors could see the paintings.
Features about women included:
Coins - mostly with male profiles, but a few female as well. If a male and female profile was present, the male was in front.
Oil paintings. Mostly of high class men, but a few women were present. In my opinion the women portrayed were in the role of 'attractive appendage to a man'. Typical of the period in which the painting was made.
Oil painting of Emma Hamilton in a coquettish pose, with a small child.
Firescreen - textile with a faded image of a woman.
Pencil drawing of a woman, with a label in french. I could not translate it, using my basic French.
Ceiling murals of semi-clad women, personifying various graces.
There was a room describing a project 'Opening up the Soane Museum', which had information. The script in the information boards referred to men by job role and name - Curator, John Smith - but Helen Dorey did not have a job role (I later found out she was the Deputy Director).
On a Recognition Board (high on the wall and illuminated), high status staff, both men and women were named and titled. It mentioned there had been turnover of Musuem Directors, leading to deputies covering the role. Lower status staff (Assistant Conservator, Community Outreach Officer, Volunteers and Visitor Assistants were mentioned but not named. Except for "Special thanks due to Lewis Bush, young and upcoming photographer".
In another corner (unilluminated) on a board, Visitor Assistants are named, and photographed, and this shows they are mostly women. Volunteers and visitor assistants were plentiful at the venue, with an approximate ratio of 4 women:1man. No way of telling who was paid/volunteering.
Analysis:
I was too tired and uninspired/disinterested to carry out quantitative analysis by counting objects. So I looked at things, made notes and concentrated on how I felt - qualitative analysis. Then I thought about semiotics - how we read signs. Semiotics is a useful theory, but has a major criticism made of it - that the theory says the meaning of signs is static - which it is not. As culture evolves, things we see change in how they are interpreted. For example, a lady in the late 1800s is often portrayed in drama, wearing a strident purple - which we now read as Victorian, and fairly ordinary. In its time, the colour of the dress indicated she was high status because purple was one of the first Perkins artificial dyes derived from a by-product of the coal tar industry, was a recent textile invention for its time, and only worn by high fashion, affluent ladies.
So, the policy of the Sir John Soane, to retain the museum as he left it, is impacting on how the building, contents and artefacts can be interpreted and understood in 21st century society. It comes across neither as a museum, nor a personal home.
Coins embossed with the head of a monarch, in profile, indicate status. It is disrespectful for a low status person to look a high status person in the eye, so coins only show high status people in profile, so the plebs cannot stare them in the eye. But 21st century society does not understand the symbolism of the profile. As the UK has had a female monarch on its coinage for 60+ years, we probably do not realise how unusual it is for a woman to be portrayed on coins.
I found the room about 'Opening up the Soane' much more interesting for analysis of women. There was considerable importance attached to the roles that staff carried out. The Recognition Board appeared to have been written with the Senior Staff (mostly men) as the intended audience, as it recognised and flattered them. One junior team member was mentioned with the senior men, and was male, 'young and upcoming'. The junior staff were referred to, but by job roles only (impossible to identify gender). Volunteers were not named, but had a group photograph (women only!) and were not representative of the people who volunteer.
The Freud Museum
This museum is a large family house in Finchley Road, an affluent area. As we entered, it felt like a family home, built in the early 20th century. It was the home of Sigmund Freud from 1938-9 - only one year! Freud was a non-practicing Jew. Freud and his family fled Austria because of harassment of the Jewish population when it was annexed by the Nazis, immediately prior to the start of WW2. They were able to obtain visas due to his professional status and connections, and migrated as a family, with their furniture and possessions, and considerable funds. They were able to pay various 'fees' by selling about a third of his book collection, and using personal funds. Presumably the Freud family remained sufficiently affluent to also purchase a large house in an expensive area, despite being refugee migrants. Anna Freud was his daughter, who lived in the house until 1982 (her death) and bequeathed it as a Musuem to Freud.
Dining room contained Anna Freud's peasant style furniture from early 1900s. Information boards on the dining table gave a brief life history of Freud, Anna, his wife, 2 housekeepers and a friend of Anna. Strong, positive representation of real people.
The downstairs lounge/study/consulting room is furnished as it was during his time, with lots of archaeological artefacts in glass cabinets. He had many human figures from various archaeological periods which he used in his work. Nora noted the different periods were all jumbled up together. Perhaps there was a different reason for assembling the objects the way they were. There was his consulting couch, with his seat behind the head of the couch, so the patient could not be distracted by seeing him.
Upstairs, on the capacious landing there was an extensive family tree, identifying Sigmund Freud, Anna Freud (daughter and child psychologist) and Lucien (great nephew and artist) and Clement Freud (great nephew and MP/broadcaster) amongst others.
In the rear bedroom, was a display about Anna Freud, a noted child psychologist. There was her desk and typewriter, and a large glass cabinet with various objects related to her - a thimble and the accompanying letter from a friend who donated it; a wooden woodpecker door knocker, typewriter, books etc. The display combined artefacts about her professional life and competence, and her domestic interests such as knitting and sewing. It made for a more rounded presentation of a deceased person.
In a front bedroom there was a consulting couch and table, but little else. The wall space is used for visiting artistic displays. The artworks on display were of black and white drawings in a month-to-a-view calendar format, presumably giving a narrative of what happened to the (male) artist throughout the month. Did not fit with my remit.
However, there were two interaction boards that asked key questions favoured by Freud. I liked the interaction potential of these.
Monday, 12 December 2016
Material Engagement Theory - Lambrous Malafouris
Material engagement theory is an archaeological theory with aims to explain long term change, specifically how cognitive abilities grow and develop. However this is not done by analysing human development in relation to evolution (i.e. when and where), but by considering what, how and why. Material engagement theory links cultural and biological evolution as inseparable synergetic processes. Human intelligence is deeply intra-active. It is elicited by our surroundings (human and environmental) and influences our thinking abilities and responses.
Individuals of the same genotype can have different neural, cognitive and behavioural outcomes, because of the impact of differing social, environmental and cultural differences and variations in life and learning experiences. This means individuals with similar gene types have outcomes that are probabilistic, rather than predetermined. Griffiths and Stoltz suggest "what individuals inherit from their ancestors is not a mind, but the ability to develop a mind".
MET aim to frame research questions to focus on dynamic relationships that are under-theorized from the viewpoint of cognitive and brain sciences - i.e. upon the interactions among brains, bodies and things. Material engagement theory tries to establish culturally and philosophically informed links between the brain's functional structure and material culture. It needs a methodology that is able to deal with different temporalities. To me, this means that our brains, evolved and operating in the 21st century, need to adapt to working with the archaeological realities. As I am interested in 'the object' I need to improve my understanding of material culture.
Archaeologists "take things seriously". Things enact and constitute a system of understanding. Objects have a transformational power that goes beyond the descriptive dimension of their life history. MET is not the backdrop to human cognition. Rather, objects mediate, shape and constitute our ways of being, and of making sense of the world. MET articulates and brings into focus the intersection of people and things. (How Things Shape the Mind, Lambroud Malafouris, ch3)
Semiotics discusses the nature of the sign. However there is a difference between material and linguistic signs. Material signs are durable - they can be touched, carried, worn, possessed, traded and destroyed. They are tactile and spacial and can understood in embodied ways. However, the linguistic sign is ephemeral, linear and sequential and does not have the properties of the material sign. Traditional semiotics tends to reduce signification to a contextual encoding and decoding, where there is a specific 'right answer' to decoding the signifier. Material engagement theory changes this outcome.
The material sign is expressive. It is an object therefore has substance and is an example of the sign - philosophisers call this 'instantiation' The linguistic sign has no substance, stands for a concept and is expressive. Material signs are not message carriers of a pre-defined social universe - they are actual physical forces that shape the social and cognitive universe - therefore are not static in time.
Individuals of the same genotype can have different neural, cognitive and behavioural outcomes, because of the impact of differing social, environmental and cultural differences and variations in life and learning experiences. This means individuals with similar gene types have outcomes that are probabilistic, rather than predetermined. Griffiths and Stoltz suggest "what individuals inherit from their ancestors is not a mind, but the ability to develop a mind".
MET aim to frame research questions to focus on dynamic relationships that are under-theorized from the viewpoint of cognitive and brain sciences - i.e. upon the interactions among brains, bodies and things. Material engagement theory tries to establish culturally and philosophically informed links between the brain's functional structure and material culture. It needs a methodology that is able to deal with different temporalities. To me, this means that our brains, evolved and operating in the 21st century, need to adapt to working with the archaeological realities. As I am interested in 'the object' I need to improve my understanding of material culture.
Archaeologists "take things seriously". Things enact and constitute a system of understanding. Objects have a transformational power that goes beyond the descriptive dimension of their life history. MET is not the backdrop to human cognition. Rather, objects mediate, shape and constitute our ways of being, and of making sense of the world. MET articulates and brings into focus the intersection of people and things. (How Things Shape the Mind, Lambroud Malafouris, ch3)
Semiotics discusses the nature of the sign. However there is a difference between material and linguistic signs. Material signs are durable - they can be touched, carried, worn, possessed, traded and destroyed. They are tactile and spacial and can understood in embodied ways. However, the linguistic sign is ephemeral, linear and sequential and does not have the properties of the material sign. Traditional semiotics tends to reduce signification to a contextual encoding and decoding, where there is a specific 'right answer' to decoding the signifier. Material engagement theory changes this outcome.
The material sign is expressive. It is an object therefore has substance and is an example of the sign - philosophisers call this 'instantiation' The linguistic sign has no substance, stands for a concept and is expressive. Material signs are not message carriers of a pre-defined social universe - they are actual physical forces that shape the social and cognitive universe - therefore are not static in time.
Friday, 2 December 2016
Thinking about my Values
One of my values that I put in my sketchbook, was 'defending the vulnerable and the voiceless'. Vanda challenged me on this, and at the time, I felt it was appropriate use of terminology. Now I am starting to change my position.
The people I was thinking about at the time (Alex, Bhuta, Anita) were being treated badly in a selection of different workplaces. They were close to severe unfavourable treatment, and some were not able to voice or argue their position. I had the arguments available to challenge the management viewpoint. However, I only defend people when I think fit (not everyone), and also have identified another person where I did not have the argument but supported that person to think the situation through. So I need to find a more appropriate term.
'Supporting people being treated unfairly' is a better term. So if I want to find out how these people define the value I demonstrate, what are the questions?
"I am trying to work our what my values are for a self portrait.
Think about when we were discussing (situation)
How did you feel before we discussed it?
What did we do?
What did you do?
What did I do?
How did it make you feel?
How was it helpful?
What was the outcome?"
The people I was thinking about at the time (Alex, Bhuta, Anita) were being treated badly in a selection of different workplaces. They were close to severe unfavourable treatment, and some were not able to voice or argue their position. I had the arguments available to challenge the management viewpoint. However, I only defend people when I think fit (not everyone), and also have identified another person where I did not have the argument but supported that person to think the situation through. So I need to find a more appropriate term.
'Supporting people being treated unfairly' is a better term. So if I want to find out how these people define the value I demonstrate, what are the questions?
"I am trying to work our what my values are for a self portrait.
Think about when we were discussing (situation)
How did you feel before we discussed it?
What did we do?
What did you do?
What did I do?
How did it make you feel?
How was it helpful?
What was the outcome?"
Presenting about our Methodologies and a useful tutorial
Our class presentations were diverse as usual. I think, as a group, we are displaying the full spectrum of problems students have when learning to develop methodology.
A methodology is meant to enable a research to have a hypothesis, gather data, test, (fail, retest, fail better) and draw a conclusion.
Our product developer was going straight from idea to making, because he wants to get stuff made. Another person gave the whole methodology from concept to output (too much info); someone else gave some great examples of developing mark making from her idiosyncratic eyeliner marks on her hand, developed with different media (stones, metal objects).
My presentation just was not very good - I showed my Values Table and Free Association writing. Danielle asked whether I was using a tabulated format as a reaction against my white collar work history. This floored me. I had no idea what she was talking about. I know I have an absolute horror of A4 paper size, due to too much time spent handling paper, but I don't think I am using a table as methodology as a reaction against clerical work. (Gareth's notes: Giving yourself a form of clerical work - job is devising the methods/process - an interesting paradox/connection in reacting against the identities.)
I was asked whether honesty was a concept - I think it is, and therefore it is difficult to portray in artwork, other than by symbolism. I am using an honesty leaf.
I was advised to seek out data - as answers to questions. I was advised to put the email requests for data about value, as an initial paragraph, prior to the table. This document forms an appendix to the report. Expect to fail, retest, fail better, go round the loop a few times, then this creates robust data. Identify what learning there is in the failing, and what is the learning in the fail better? (This is critical).
Think about "problem" -v- "research". When you think about a problem, there is a tendency to go straight to the solution. However, as researchers, it is about coming up with ideas on how one might find things out - so first find the question, do many drawings, find many solutions. Identify who am I when I am researching. Much more generation of ideas. Be very clear about how you do it. We are doing making research not product research.
Be pragmatic. Clearly define your concept. More drawing.
Then I had a tutorial with Linden which I found really helpful. We discussed how to use the table and its data to move into sketchbook interpretation. She made me focus on what I am interested in:
Valuing the Under-valued
Exploring representation
Dignity of people -v- expendable people
I need to negotiate value - restrict the range, and find out about representation of value.
I am not interested in the difference in how genders are valued and in what way. It is just about women for me.
Advised to read Mark Johnson The Moral Imagination (ebook via LM library) He talks about negotiating own values.
Don't look at/worry about too many philosophies - they often miss out the relationship between us and the world we inhabit and the matter/substance of it.
I am interested in the hand tool.
Ask why are these women interesting?
Interlocutor
Stories about Alex, Bhuta, Anita. What is the question about I am asking about these people. Why do their cases interest me?
What should be valued? Who should be doing the valuing?
Do free association writing about halo and horns.
Interested in behaviour.
Consider gestures in representation. Linden's African women sculptures at Sainsbury Centre. Portrayals of success - woman, baby, breasts - success - I have a child and I can feed it.
A methodology is meant to enable a research to have a hypothesis, gather data, test, (fail, retest, fail better) and draw a conclusion.
Our product developer was going straight from idea to making, because he wants to get stuff made. Another person gave the whole methodology from concept to output (too much info); someone else gave some great examples of developing mark making from her idiosyncratic eyeliner marks on her hand, developed with different media (stones, metal objects).
My presentation just was not very good - I showed my Values Table and Free Association writing. Danielle asked whether I was using a tabulated format as a reaction against my white collar work history. This floored me. I had no idea what she was talking about. I know I have an absolute horror of A4 paper size, due to too much time spent handling paper, but I don't think I am using a table as methodology as a reaction against clerical work. (Gareth's notes: Giving yourself a form of clerical work - job is devising the methods/process - an interesting paradox/connection in reacting against the identities.)
I was asked whether honesty was a concept - I think it is, and therefore it is difficult to portray in artwork, other than by symbolism. I am using an honesty leaf.
I was advised to seek out data - as answers to questions. I was advised to put the email requests for data about value, as an initial paragraph, prior to the table. This document forms an appendix to the report. Expect to fail, retest, fail better, go round the loop a few times, then this creates robust data. Identify what learning there is in the failing, and what is the learning in the fail better? (This is critical).
Think about "problem" -v- "research". When you think about a problem, there is a tendency to go straight to the solution. However, as researchers, it is about coming up with ideas on how one might find things out - so first find the question, do many drawings, find many solutions. Identify who am I when I am researching. Much more generation of ideas. Be very clear about how you do it. We are doing making research not product research.
Be pragmatic. Clearly define your concept. More drawing.
Then I had a tutorial with Linden which I found really helpful. We discussed how to use the table and its data to move into sketchbook interpretation. She made me focus on what I am interested in:
Valuing the Under-valued
Exploring representation
Dignity of people -v- expendable people
I need to negotiate value - restrict the range, and find out about representation of value.
I am not interested in the difference in how genders are valued and in what way. It is just about women for me.
Advised to read Mark Johnson The Moral Imagination (ebook via LM library) He talks about negotiating own values.
Don't look at/worry about too many philosophies - they often miss out the relationship between us and the world we inhabit and the matter/substance of it.
I am interested in the hand tool.
Ask why are these women interesting?
Interlocutor
Stories about Alex, Bhuta, Anita. What is the question about I am asking about these people. Why do their cases interest me?
What should be valued? Who should be doing the valuing?
Do free association writing about halo and horns.
Interested in behaviour.
Consider gestures in representation. Linden's African women sculptures at Sainsbury Centre. Portrayals of success - woman, baby, breasts - success - I have a child and I can feed it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)