Students wrote a comment or question (based on our reading) on a note card at the beginning of class and we discussed our reading.
Some comments from the cards follow:
- It is evident that postmodernism had little to no guidelines, but what is it exactly that seperates postmodern from modern other than just the rules? Who were some of the most famous postmodern artists? Overall postmodern does seem like just a state of mind. I want to know what state of mind the artists were in to have the ability to create and think of such ideas.
- I really liked on page 35 the notion of propaganda drawings being “realism comprehensible”. The use of drawings in Stalinism and the repression of constructivism in favor of realism / socialist realism, the reality the government wants you to see. In class we discuss pictures as visual text, which is what I’m getting out of this section.
- I still don’t really get the idea of modernism coming after postmodernism. I like the charts. The end of the section really pulled everything together for me. Who would sign a urinal and call it art anyway?
- The use of technology will always be criticized as “not art” or “cheating”.
- In general, do people have a problem with postmodernism because it is so different? The book made it seem like a controversial topic. There are two different ways to interpret the dilemma of reproducibility, either the number of copies reduces the value of the original because there are so many, or it increases the value because there are so many fakes.
- In the age of mechanical reproduction I thought it was interesting that the authority of original work comes from their “unreproducibility” or uniqueness.