





Research by drawing students at Duke University






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.



"Art is the elimination of the unnecessary. " – Picasso
Picasso was born in October 25, 1881 in Malaga, Spain and died April 8, `973 in Mougins, France. From an early age Picasso showed an interest in drawing which lead to his father formally training him. When his family moved to Barcelona, his father took up a professorship at the School of Fine Arts and convinced the academy to let young Picasso take an entrance exam. He passed and was admitted into the school at the age of 13. Picasso’s father later sent him to Madrid to attend the Royal Academy of San Fernando where eventually dropped out because of dislike the instruction at the school. He also had realized that he no longer wanted to be part of his parent’s plan for his future. He set out for Paris shortly after dropping out and maintained connections in Paris and Barcelona. His career set out after this.
His early life really defined his life’s work. He had been a formally trained artist who had met all of his parent’s expectations but realized that he no longer wanted to be a part of that. His work is very distinct in that he never settled on a single style or medium but was able to express himself in so many ways. His work is a dissonance of his training. It is not precise but expressive.
I saw some of Picasso’s work when it was exhibited in the Nasher last year. I was very impressed by the wide range of work he had produced. There were a series of sketches and charcoal drawings that were standouts to me. The sketches were rough and incomplete but were still cohesive and well made. In many ways those sketches were his way of sculpting his subjects with lines instead of stone. He was able to eliminate all the unnecessary visual noise to create work that got to the core of the subject.
I hope to see his work next semester when I visit Barcelona.