Comments on: In which I get uppity in a lecture http://wongablog.co.uk/2008/03/10/in-which-i-get-uppity-in-a-lecture/ like balloons, only with dancing Thu, 20 Nov 2008 09:54:22 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Paroxysm http://wongablog.co.uk/2008/03/10/in-which-i-get-uppity-in-a-lecture/#comment-17235 Paroxysm Sat, 15 Mar 2008 09:17:21 +0000 http://wongablog.co.uk/2008/03/10/in-which-i-get-uppity-in-a-lecture/#comment-17235 You're going to come across an incredible number of theoretical frameworks which cannot be measured or qualified in any way outisde of your own subjective opinion. Alas, an arts subject. Whenever I came across anything in the arts with the word 'theory' attached, I would simply place it in my 'interesting possibilities' bin and not take it too seriously. It was important for me to appreciate how people categorized and attempted to manifest ideas which were rooted in subjective opinion. In this sense Freudian Theory was a little like a painting for me; the viewer took away very personal opinions about a generalised framework of value judgements. Whenever you attempt to write critical examinations or reviews of a piece of art...YOU WILL NOT be able to do so without somebody stepping in and saying, 'that's bollocks, where's the proof?'. Unless of course you write a dry, useless history of a particular school or artist which you could have copied verbatim from an encyclopedia. Even then, people will challenge 'commonly held beliefs' about a certain subject. If I ask you why you like Halsman's 'Dali Atomicus' and requested you really drill down into the reasons why it speaks to you in such a way, you would eventually have to deviate from 'i just like it' to 'here are the reasons why i think I like it...'. You are expected to reflect upon your subjective experience of an art piece; and in doing so you cross the threshold you seem so reluctant to cross. Freudian theory is just a useful tool for analysing certain things. In 'Civilisation and its Discontents' Freud makes some incredibly inciteful comments about why the individual acts in a certain way in social situations. What makes them inciteful for me is not the fact that I can say 'wow that's been vindicated by the last 70 years of scientific enquiry' but that I can say 'That makes a lot of sense FOR ME when considering Munch's 'The Scream' etc.' You’re going to come across an incredible number of theoretical frameworks which cannot be measured or qualified in any way outisde of your own subjective opinion. Alas, an arts subject. Whenever I came across anything in the arts with the word ‘theory’ attached, I would simply place it in my ‘interesting possibilities’ bin and not take it too seriously. It was important for me to appreciate how people categorized and attempted to manifest ideas which were rooted in subjective opinion. In this sense Freudian Theory was a little like a painting for me; the viewer took away very personal opinions about a generalised framework of value judgements.

Whenever you attempt to write critical examinations or reviews of a piece of art…YOU WILL NOT be able to do so without somebody stepping in and saying, ‘that’s bollocks, where’s the proof?’. Unless of course you write a dry, useless history of a particular school or artist which you could have copied verbatim from an encyclopedia. Even then, people will challenge ‘commonly held beliefs’ about a certain subject. If I ask you why you like Halsman’s ‘Dali Atomicus’ and requested you really drill down into the reasons why it speaks to you in such a way, you would eventually have to deviate from ‘i just like it’ to ‘here are the reasons why i think I like it…’. You are expected to reflect upon your subjective experience of an art piece; and in doing so you cross the threshold you seem so reluctant to cross.

Freudian theory is just a useful tool for analysing certain things. In ‘Civilisation and its Discontents’ Freud makes some incredibly inciteful comments about why the individual acts in a certain way in social situations. What makes them inciteful for me is not the fact that I can say ‘wow that’s been vindicated by the last 70 years of scientific enquiry’ but that I can say ‘That makes a lot of sense FOR ME when considering Munch’s ‘The Scream’ etc.’

]]> By: Andrew http://wongablog.co.uk/2008/03/10/in-which-i-get-uppity-in-a-lecture/#comment-17050 Andrew Wed, 12 Mar 2008 01:07:27 +0000 http://wongablog.co.uk/2008/03/10/in-which-i-get-uppity-in-a-lecture/#comment-17050 Thanks, guys - was hoping that'd be the consensus! Yes, it's definitely strongly related to surrealism so worth studying in that respect. It does keep turning up in general analysis of 'normal' photos, though, which is where I get a bit annoyed. I don't think I've seen that room...damn, I must have missed loads when I went in the summer. Must go back. Thanks, guys - was hoping that’d be the consensus!

Yes, it’s definitely strongly related to surrealism so worth studying in that respect. It does keep turning up in general analysis of ‘normal’ photos, though, which is where I get a bit annoyed.

I don’t think I’ve seen that room…damn, I must have missed loads when I went in the summer. Must go back.

]]> By: Skuds http://wongablog.co.uk/2008/03/10/in-which-i-get-uppity-in-a-lecture/#comment-16986 Skuds Mon, 10 Mar 2008 22:34:38 +0000 http://wongablog.co.uk/2008/03/10/in-which-i-get-uppity-in-a-lecture/#comment-16986 I'll second that. Even if you are absolutely wrong, someone might point out why which could be handy. The only reason not to lob the odd hand grenade in is if you have one of those lecturers who expect, or demand, that you only submit work that repeats their own opinions - and if you have one of them you are not going to be encouraged to think clearly anyway. But coming back to your original observation... I'm sure there is a technique for establishing the likelihood of something being true by twisting it 180 degrees and seeing how it stands up. So ask yourself whether you would be more traumatised that your mother has no penis or by finding out that she had bigger tackle than the North Sea fishing fleet (to quote Ben Elton) I know which would have me running to therapy! Whatever your opinions of Freud though , it is fact that his theories influenced the original wave of surrealists and they are the influence for all who come after, so its probably worth knowing about in order to better understand the history of surrealism. By the way, as an habitual visitor to Tate Modern, what do you think of that whole room exhibit about Freud - the one with the whole wall full of boxes containing odd objects? I think it would have been a better concept if the boxes were all closed so you had to trust the contents were as listed. I’ll second that. Even if you are absolutely wrong, someone might point out why which could be handy. The only reason not to lob the odd hand grenade in is if you have one of those lecturers who expect, or demand, that you only submit work that repeats their own opinions - and if you have one of them you are not going to be encouraged to think clearly anyway.

But coming back to your original observation… I’m sure there is a technique for establishing the likelihood of something being true by twisting it 180 degrees and seeing how it stands up. So ask yourself whether you would be more traumatised that your mother has no penis or by finding out that she had bigger tackle than the North Sea fishing fleet (to quote Ben Elton) I know which would have me running to therapy!

Whatever your opinions of Freud though , it is fact that his theories influenced the original wave of surrealists and they are the influence for all who come after, so its probably worth knowing about in order to better understand the history of surrealism.

By the way, as an habitual visitor to Tate Modern, what do you think of that whole room exhibit about Freud - the one with the whole wall full of boxes containing odd objects? I think it would have been a better concept if the boxes were all closed so you had to trust the contents were as listed.

]]> By: Darkwinter http://wongablog.co.uk/2008/03/10/in-which-i-get-uppity-in-a-lecture/#comment-16971 Darkwinter Mon, 10 Mar 2008 16:41:17 +0000 http://wongablog.co.uk/2008/03/10/in-which-i-get-uppity-in-a-lecture/#comment-16971 I think it's always a good idea to speak up in lectures - there's only so much you learn by listening to one person's take on any one subject, even if they're a leader in the field. There's always the remote possibility that they hadn't considered what you're considering, or that they're hoping nobody calls them on a particular point. Discussion is the best way to learn, in my books. Besides, if there's something you're not clear on, you're a) doing yourself no favours keeping quiet about it and b) likely not alone in your lack of understanding. I think it’s always a good idea to speak up in lectures - there’s only so much you learn by listening to one person’s take on any one subject, even if they’re a leader in the field. There’s always the remote possibility that they hadn’t considered what you’re considering, or that they’re hoping nobody calls them on a particular point. Discussion is the best way to learn, in my books. Besides, if there’s something you’re not clear on, you’re a) doing yourself no favours keeping quiet about it and b) likely not alone in your lack of understanding.

]]>