Friday, December 10, 2010

Parallels of art and architecture

After taking 2 art history architecture classes I have come to see the strong parallels that architecture has to art. In the time of John Ruskin, architecture was an art form but now in out contemporary society architecture has to do more with engineering than with our. In the rush to become modernist societies, the idea that form should follow function left out form completely. This also has to do with out capitalist society of production and functionality over all. Even though more consideration was made to from following the end of the modernist era and into the Bauhaus, that idea of functionality first always came before the aesthetic concern of the building.

I feel that as an art student, I have become that contemporary architecture that only focuses on production and not on substance. If we really think about it we all have become that in a way. We, as an American society, have harbored this meaningless culture of eclectic styles that we have slapped multiple styles to things that don’t belong. Meaning is also slapped into artwork as an afterthought and others dig up meaning out of nothing. Building blocks are not emphasized and creativity is always limited by prenotions of what assignments should look like. We work by trying to make our work look like someone else’s work. Every art student is guilty of this. We don’t allow ourselves to really become inspired by anything at all. We are overly concerned with wanting to make artwork look a certain way. That doesn’t mean that we should look to other work for inspiration, it just means that we need to deviate from things more. I think most importantly, our work should really mean something; stem from our beliefs, impressions, expressions, etc.

No comments:

Post a Comment