Marco Maggi reminded me somewhat of Charles Ray in the sense that he uses mundane materials to create works. Also, despite his commercial success, something he's not all that thrilled by, he's quite humble. The quote that I say would best describe Marco would be, "...Speak softly and carry a big stick." (Theodore Roosevelt) His works are so simple and non-intrusive that where most would expect bold and loud you see quiet yet it still garners people's attentions.
Gregory Green, much like Scott Greiger, comes off to me as a tad extreme. I mean, placing the potential means and/or ideas of the simplicity of bomb-building in a somewhat neat package comes off a tad alarming. I get his intentions are to show that the weak can and are capable of creating something to defends themselves. I mean I appreciate that he doesn't give the legit recipes, but I don't know like he said it's something anyone can easily look up on the internet or through Youtube videos...It's too much for my taste.
China Adams...Oh boy, where to start? I know the world is a constant state of selling yourself in one way or another, but China just takes it to another level. Her exhibits and works made me think of the concept of a "Legal Black Market Yard Sale." I'm not sure if that's legit terminology, but if it's not well, China created it and she could probably trademark that name and hang that up on a wall to sell, while she's at it.
Gregory Green is definitely interesting. I respect that he wants to spread awareness that we as people, regardless of intelligence or wealth, can make bombs as means to defend. If the government has access to such weaponry, why should we as humans be defenseless? At any moment the system can turn against us, and leave the majority of Americans vulnerable. Information is accessible through books, internet sources, and manuals with a low cost budget at practically any shopping center. It does make me wonder how the public would react if Green was a Muslim, considering the direction media is taking.
China Adams presents very psychological questions that pertain to humanities 'timeless concerns'. The section, "Will my possessions be discarded after I die?" resonated with me the most. Humans will forever treasure belongings, usually after the death of someone important or value of the item itself. It had me questioning if I want my belongings to be saved and remembered, or disposed of to let my presence rest in peace. Privacy seems non-existent after death, and I'm not sure if I want people scrolling through my personal letters or statements. Also, if I had an item that had high personal value, but practically no value to someone else, I would not want it disposed. Adams's dives into sketchy territory when it came down to drinking 9 people's blood. I understand it was an action out of love and she wanted to perform an act that went with our time, but I don't see it working with how love is expressed today. Although, it does make you wonder who's blood you would drink if you had to express 'love'.
The impression I get from Marco Maggi rather gives me relief of stress in my attitude towards the fine art world. I was always overwhelmed with how everything required a deep meaning, or shock like the text explains. Instead, his work is "shy", and has its "alternative world with its own rules". I think art can be complex and almost takes away from the artwork being art in itself. A painting can simply be a painting, and nothing more. Although Maggi's work does not demonstrate 'shocking' skill and craft, it has a humble presence that wants you to accept it for its simpleness and existence as a piece of art.
I really appreciate Marco Maggi's work. It reminds me of what being a artist is really about. It isn't only about creating a "wow" factor in art but also challenging the viewer to understand your statement. Maggi's work is exactly that. His work is very humble and simple and yet challenges the viewer. I really admire the simple materials he works with and the finish product.
Gregory Green is the opposite of Maggi. He is more of a extremist. Green touches on topics, like bombs, that would shock viewers. Although Green's personality does not match his art work it matches his thoughts. His art incorporates the abuse perpetrated by the government and even media. I think Green's art is very bold and definitely makes a statement.
I can really relate to China Adams idea of art. Making art relatable to most because it can be intimidating. I felt the same way at one point when visiting galleries in New York. Her work is based resolving issues with mortality, which is a common human experience.
Marco Maggi is very skilled at taking inexpensive and ordinary materials and creating unique pieces of art. He explains that he is not trying to change the world with his work. He describes himself as a simple person. There is no groundbreaking discovery or controversial issue addressed in his work.
Green, unlike Maggi, has a very firm opinion that circulates throughout his work. He focuses his attention on terrorism. He believes that people should not rely on violence to resolve issues. Green conveys this message through very bold political statements and images. One of his pieces gives the "recipe" for a Molotov cocktail, which was not received well by law enforcement. Even though his work seemed to be extremely violent, he was successful in bringing attention to a controversial issue.
China Adams takes a more eccentric approach with her work. She exposes humanity's greatest fears and insecurities like how to deal with death and how to express true love. Human emotion is definitely the main focus of her work. She believes art is a "social therapy" that can help us to address things that make us uncomfortable. Adams also incorporates humor into her work to give the viewer a sense of optimism.
Marco Maggi is someone to respect in the fact that he stays humble and believes in creating hia own worl , not needing to be loud or blatant. He decided to create his own works and his own world through them essentially.It was amazing that his early success is what lead him on an hiatus but it also makes sense as to why his pieces are so much more discrete and it amazes me that despite being discrete he can take ordinary items and make them so interesting.
China was the one I found most interesting. The way she actually tried to sell her bones on dispkay and tackled the psychological thoughts of death our importance and what can happen with us and our prize possesions after detah.Its an approach i would have never thought to take or thought to exist. Especially the vampirism. That she could go and perform what we would consider vampiric activites which would appal many and relate it to intimacy and trust kinda blew my mind but it made sense. So her article truly intrigued me.
Greggory Green has the shock factor of China and is rather the opposite of the humble Maggi. He decides to use more fearful topics like actually making bombs and displaying them in the gallery space. He uses these pieces of art to confront, make statements and produce almost an anarchy with the knowledge he is presenting in his work. So his article was interesting but a bit unnerving in the sense that he was sp focused on these violent topics and even gave to the audience ways to produce things like the Molotov Cocktail.
Marco Maggi, China Adams, and Gregory Green are all extremely talented artist. Of the three I'd have to say that Marco Maggi is by far one of my favorites his work is quite but very attractive. He can take the most humble of items and make then into contemporary art pieces. China Adams is also interesting because she deals with things that can't be seen like emotional and creates are that represents and or symbolizes the emotion. China Adams treats art as a therapeutic medium and thus expresses that in her work by making it something people can associate with. Gregory green however, is more proactive with his work. He is not afraid to tackle what is controversial. Most of Greens works are centered on promoting going against terrorism. He presents work that show the brutality of violence which I interpreted as a way of awakening the people to the terror in violence and war. Over all, all artists try to relay a strong message or meaning behind their work without fully giving the details. I believe that this is something curtail to out learning experience because art especially today's art is not very literal and being able to relay a message to the viewer of your piece is important. Being able to relay your message with very few detail is even more important. In the end I enjoyed these artist and hope that I will be able to see their works at some point.
I am inspired by Maggi for the kind of person he is. He does not strive to create work that will make the viewer ponder and contemplate life. He is such a humble man for that and I can only wish I shared at least a bit of that same trait from him. Inot the art field today, it is so full of people trying to rewrite the art world, so if is a breath of fresh air to get something new.
Green was an interesting man on the way he went about trying to send his message across. He was into giving the people the means in which they can depend on themselves and take power. However he went about this by giving the people the knowledge on howhat to build very dangerous weapons such as bombs. I understand what he is doing but I feel that this way to go about it may be a bit extreme
I admire the work of China. She wants to engage on the topics that the human race has no answer to. Questions on things such as life after death. Her art is about finding answers and coming up with a possible hypothesis for some of these things. This topic is a sensation one for the humanext race, especially for that of today's generation. So I strongly believe that the works of China can provide some comfort.
Marco Maggi reminded me somewhat of Charles Ray in the sense that he uses mundane materials to create works. Also, despite his commercial success, something he's not all that thrilled by, he's quite humble. The quote that I say would best describe Marco would be, "...Speak softly and carry a big stick." (Theodore Roosevelt) His works are so simple and non-intrusive that where most would expect bold and loud you see quiet yet it still garners people's attentions.
ReplyDeleteGregory Green, much like Scott Greiger, comes off to me as a tad extreme. I mean, placing the potential means and/or ideas of the simplicity of bomb-building in a somewhat neat package comes off a tad alarming. I get his intentions are to show that the weak can and are capable of creating something to defends themselves. I mean I appreciate that he doesn't give the legit recipes, but I don't know like he said it's something anyone can easily look up on the internet or through Youtube videos...It's too much for my taste.
China Adams...Oh boy, where to start? I know the world is a constant state of selling yourself in one way or another, but China just takes it to another level. Her exhibits and works made me think of the concept of a "Legal Black Market Yard Sale." I'm not sure if that's legit terminology, but if it's not well, China created it and she could probably trademark that name and hang that up on a wall to sell, while she's at it.
Gregory Green is definitely interesting. I respect that he wants to spread awareness that we as people, regardless of intelligence or wealth, can make bombs as means to defend. If the government has access to such weaponry, why should we as humans be defenseless? At any moment the system can turn against us, and leave the majority of Americans vulnerable. Information is accessible through books, internet sources, and manuals with a low cost budget at practically any shopping center. It does make me wonder how the public would react if Green was a Muslim, considering the direction media is taking.
ReplyDeleteChina Adams presents very psychological questions that pertain to humanities 'timeless concerns'. The section, "Will my possessions be discarded after I die?" resonated with me the most. Humans will forever treasure belongings, usually after the death of someone important or value of the item itself. It had me questioning if I want my belongings to be saved and remembered, or disposed of to let my presence rest in peace. Privacy seems non-existent after death, and I'm not sure if I want people scrolling through my personal letters or statements. Also, if I had an item that had high personal value, but practically no value to someone else, I would not want it disposed. Adams's dives into sketchy territory when it came down to drinking 9 people's blood. I understand it was an action out of love and she wanted to perform an act that went with our time, but I don't see it working with how love is expressed today. Although, it does make you wonder who's blood you would drink if you had to express 'love'.
The impression I get from Marco Maggi rather gives me relief of stress in my attitude towards the fine art world. I was always overwhelmed with how everything required a deep meaning, or shock like the text explains. Instead, his work is "shy", and has its "alternative world with its own rules". I think art can be complex and almost takes away from the artwork being art in itself. A painting can simply be a painting, and nothing more. Although Maggi's work does not demonstrate 'shocking' skill and craft, it has a humble presence that wants you to accept it for its simpleness and existence as a piece of art.
I really appreciate Marco Maggi's work. It reminds me of what being a artist is really about. It isn't only about creating a "wow" factor in art but also challenging the viewer to understand your statement. Maggi's work is exactly that. His work is very humble and simple and yet challenges the viewer. I really admire the simple materials he works with and the finish product.
ReplyDeleteGregory Green is the opposite of Maggi. He is more of a extremist. Green touches on topics, like bombs, that would shock viewers. Although Green's personality does not match his art work it matches his thoughts. His art incorporates the abuse perpetrated by the government and even media. I think Green's art is very bold and definitely makes a statement.
I can really relate to China Adams idea of art. Making art relatable to most because it can be intimidating. I felt the same way at one point when visiting galleries in New York. Her work is based resolving issues with mortality, which is a common human experience.
Marco Maggi is very skilled at taking inexpensive and ordinary materials and creating unique pieces of art. He explains that he is not trying to change the world with his work. He describes himself as a simple person. There is no groundbreaking discovery or controversial issue addressed in his work.
ReplyDeleteGreen, unlike Maggi, has a very firm opinion that circulates throughout his work. He focuses his attention on terrorism. He believes that people should not rely on violence to resolve issues. Green conveys this message through very bold political statements and images. One of his pieces gives the "recipe" for a Molotov cocktail, which was not received well by law enforcement. Even though his work seemed to be extremely violent, he was successful in
bringing attention to a controversial issue.
China Adams takes a more eccentric approach with her work. She exposes humanity's greatest fears and insecurities like how to deal with death and how to express true love. Human emotion is definitely the main focus of her work. She believes art is a "social therapy" that can help us to address things that make us uncomfortable. Adams also incorporates humor into her work to give the viewer a sense of optimism.
Marco Maggi is someone to respect in the fact that he stays humble and believes in creating hia own worl , not needing to be loud or blatant. He decided to create his own works and his own world through them essentially.It was amazing that his early success is what lead him on an hiatus but it also makes sense as to why his pieces are so much more discrete and it amazes me that despite being discrete he can take ordinary items and make them so interesting.
ReplyDeleteChina was the one I found most interesting. The way she actually tried to sell her bones on dispkay and tackled the psychological thoughts of death our importance and what can happen with us and our prize possesions after detah.Its an approach i would have never thought to take or thought to exist. Especially the vampirism. That she could go and perform what we would consider vampiric activites which would appal many and relate it to intimacy and trust kinda blew my mind but it made sense. So her article truly intrigued me.
Greggory Green has the shock factor of China and is rather the opposite of the humble Maggi. He decides to use more fearful topics like actually making bombs and displaying them in the gallery space. He uses these pieces of art to confront, make statements and produce almost an anarchy with the knowledge he is presenting in his work. So his article was interesting but a bit unnerving in the sense that he was sp focused on these violent topics and even gave to the audience ways to produce things like the Molotov Cocktail.
Marco Maggi, China Adams, and Gregory Green are all extremely talented artist. Of the three I'd have to say that Marco Maggi is by far one of my favorites his work is quite but very attractive. He can take the most humble of items and make then into contemporary art pieces. China Adams is also interesting because she deals with things that can't be seen like emotional and creates are that represents and or symbolizes the emotion. China Adams treats art as a therapeutic medium and thus expresses that in her work by making it something people can associate with.
ReplyDeleteGregory green however, is more proactive with his work. He is not afraid to tackle what is controversial. Most of Greens works are centered on promoting going against terrorism. He presents work that show the brutality of violence which I interpreted as a way of awakening the people to the terror in violence and war. Over all, all artists try to relay a strong message or meaning behind their work without fully giving the details. I believe that this is something curtail to out learning experience because art especially today's art is not very literal and being able to relay a message to the viewer of your piece is important. Being able to relay your message with very few detail is even more important. In the end I enjoyed these artist and hope that I will be able to see their works at some point.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI am inspired by Maggi for the kind of person he is. He does not strive to create work that will make the viewer ponder and contemplate life. He is such a humble man for that and I can only wish I shared at least a bit of that same trait from him. Inot the art field today, it is so full of people trying to rewrite the art world, so if is a breath of fresh air to get something new.
ReplyDeleteGreen was an interesting man on the way he went about trying to send his message across. He was into giving the people the means in which they can depend on themselves and take power. However he went about this by giving the people the knowledge on howhat to build very dangerous weapons such as bombs. I understand what he is doing but I feel that this way to go about it may be a bit extreme
I admire the work of China. She wants to engage on the topics that the human race has no answer to. Questions on things such as life after death. Her art is about finding answers and coming up with a possible hypothesis for some of these things. This topic is a sensation one for the humanext race, especially for that of today's generation. So I strongly believe that the works of China can provide some comfort.