Hearts and Minds

Hearts and Minds was a very compelling documentary.  Many of the scenes were difficult to watch of difficult to hear some of the interviews from soldiers, but it was powerful and made a very strong argument.  The film argues that the Vietnam War was a mistake of the US government produced by deceit and brainwashing of soldiers and the killing and genocide of many innocent Vietnamese.  

The main aspect of the documentary that stood out to me was a specific quote: "How do we know we are not fighting on the wrong side?  On the wrong side? We ARE the wrong side."  After this quote my entire feeling of the documentary changed.  I then was compelled to see the horribly negative images and embrace the consequences of the US's essential ruin of Vietnam.  The way the camera cut from an interview with a Vietnam veteran, to a film clip accompanied by strong soundtrack, to a scene of a destructed village or a speech by a President supporting "our efforts" in the Vietnam War was fascinating.  

After the "wrong side" quote all of the arguments that I saw being made, or evidence used to support those arguments was more powerful.  I found myself to be uninterested in the first 30-45 minutes of the documentary and as Hearts and Minds progressed so did my interest.  The film essentially followed my emotion directly.  The beginning and ending scenes describe it best.  The man discussing the destruction of his house and pig farm then the last scene he is crying out in anguish, so passionate and angry about what has happened to him, his family and his way of life.  Essentially, everything started off as passive and ended with passion and aggression.  

Hearts and Minds

Diane Arbus - Tattooed Man at a Carnival

Susan Sontag's discussion critiquing Diane Arbus's photographs was a huge insight into Arbus's work. Prior to this reading I had encountered various Diane Arbus photographs but did not know any background information about her and her work.

Tattooed Man at a Carnival is not a photograph specifically discussed in the reading; however, it still has many of the elements common to Arbus. The direct eye contact of the man along with the photograph being of a so-called "freak" and the zoom-in camera position. Finding Arbus's argument in this image is difficult without extensive background information, luckily Sontag provided much of that. I think the main goal or argument of this image is to form a response from the viewer on how we as an onlooker view people that are considered abnormal. Whether pity or disgust is evoked.

There is also an odd sense of location and context in this photograph. Was the man asked to not smile? Was he just finishing a show or ending one? Photography is difficult to completely get a message from without this type of context. From Sontag it can be inferred that Diane Arbus did try to get as much emotion out of her subject, instead of taking a picture of only his tattoos. Arbus was interested in not just the abnormal quirks or characteristics but the people themselves.

DUANE HANSON Vietnam Scene. Installation.

The first time I saw Duane Hanson's Vietnam Scene. Installation.  it was very shocking to me.  I could not believe that such a dehumanizing scene would be photographed.  Then I glanced at the "specs" of the photograph.  This work of art was not a straight photograph (one taken without altering or changing the scene), it was an installation at a museum.  The photograph then became even more interesting to me.  

After doing some research on Duane Hanson I came to find out that he is a sculptor and the figures shown are not real people with make up or props but scupltures.  Moreover, the figures body positions, particularily the figure sitting up, are extremely realistic.  The argument in this image is the photographer is trying to play on the viewers emotions of how the Vietnam War was depicted on the news by showing American soldiers in the way the Vietnamese were depicted during that time.  

The way that this scene is taken out of context, being that of the a battlefield or war zone, and put on a hardwood floor in a museum is some what conflicting.  However, I believe it to be completely intentional by the artist.  Photographs such as this, controversial perhaps a deeper meaning than at first glancing, are my favorite type; however, they take some outside research and thought to be understood.

Introduction

I think everyone has a certain interest or hobby that contributes to how they define success or what is important to them.  Therefore, art defines me.  Art is my passion and is something I do not think I could ever know enough about.  Side comment: does that make me an art nerd? Due to my desire to learn anything and everything about art I have devoted this blog to inform myself and others about thought provoking artists I come across.

How I intend to find these thought provoking artists will probably change.  I'm the type of person who likes to make lists: to-do lists, grocery lists, things to remember lists, etc.  Therefore, it should not be surprising that when I visit a museum, gallery or any place that has art.  I write the names of the artist and title of work down.  Now where these little pieces of paper are is another situation.  I also am fortunate to have many books filled with art, of different time periods and mediums that I might reference as well.

I am able to appreciate all subject matter, media, level of technique, etc.  I am always the person on the defending, sometimes pretentiously, side of the "How is this art?" debate.  But lately I have been interested in photography, black and white photography in the 20th century specifically, so I plan to explore a few different photographers along with the more traditional media.