assignment 5

Colour—abstraction, perception and modernity

1. Considering this week’s lecture and reading, "Colours of the Mind” by

John Gage, respond to the following question (approximately 150 - 250 words, as needed):

How has the experience and experimentation of artists influenced our understanding of colour and the development of a theory of ‘colour vision’?

The understanding we have obtained through the experimentation and experiences of artists has greatly influenced the understanding of colour in our world today. Artists, utilizing many different techniques over the years have helped create the development of ‘colour vision’. Pushing the boundaries, the methods of experimentation the artists used came from the factor that art was no longer been seen as a way of storing images and become a more expressive form. Artists were then beginning to paint whatever and in any style they deem fit.

The knowledge the artists gained themselves mostly came from the research done by individuals such as Goethe. Goethe was investigating the affects of light/shade and colour. Looking into colour vision, expanded the different techniques artists used, and what they were painting, with paintings becoming more abstract and passionate. Colour helped play a vital role in allowing the artists to express themselves more freely. Some of these techniques involved simply just “try to forget what objects you have before you[1]” “merely think, here is a little square of blue”[2]. Ogden Rood then took this idea further, utilizing only dots to produce beautiful works of art, which appear simple from up close, but show tremendous beauty when admired from a distance, shown in the image bellow.

The experimentation of these different techniques is what I believe to be one of the main factors that have influenced the world of painting, and design today.

[3]

---

[1] John Gage; colour and culture, practice and meaning from antiquity to abstraction. Page; 209

[2] John Gage; colour and culture, practice and meaning from antiquity to abstraction. Page; 209

[3] Ogden Rood; (1888) painting;  Georges Seurat, The Seine at Le Grande Jatte, 1888; found in Victoria university DSDN 171; lecture 5; Colour: abstraction, perception and modernity

Assigment three

Considering this week’s lecture and reading, "Ornament and Crime” by Adolf Loos, respond to the following question (approximately 150 - 250 words, as needed):

Adolf Loos argued in 1908 that, “The evolution of culture is synonymous with the removal of ornament from objects of daily use.” Do you agree or disagree? Why?

2. Post your response in your DSDN171 blog along with an image supporting your argument. Be sure to address this image in your response. Also please include specific references to our reading and/or lecture for the week to support your response.

An ornament is “a pure, abstract carrier of beauty and culture” (slide 31). Disagreeing with Adolf Loos argument, I believe that the removal of ornaments from objects of daily use would remove a significant proportion of the culture surrounding this object. The design of an object is influenced in some way by the cultural attributes of the designer. Furthermore I believe that these attributes of the different cultures in the world are what make the designs of objects different. I believe the removal of ornaments from designs would have a lingering affect upon the evolution of culture within a society, as individuals would lose their ability to create a unique cultural flair to their designs.

I deem that the addiction of the ornaments to daily objects, are there for cultural purposes to begin with. As the designer may have been motivated by his/her culture, and wanted to create their mark upon the world through the object they are designing. The addition of ornaments helps modify their culture, making it different from another, and through time becoming defining points for their particular culture.

K.P. Moritz (1785) stated that “we seem to lose ourselves in the beautiful object.” And I believe this to be true, however I think it is human nature to “willingly allow our pleasure, which beauty defines for us, to take precedence over all our other feelings” furthermore I believe we display our culture differences all the time, including in what we choose to furnish our homes with. This choice allows us to display our culture heritage to others, shown through the image of the Indian sideboard shown bellow.

Contradicting Adolf Loos, I believe that we should not be trying to extinguish our culture backgrounds, but hold on to them. As we grow more and more as a society our cultures are combining, and we are losing what makes us different.

Assignment three :)

1. In The Grammar of Ornament (1856) Owen Jones argued that, “Construction should be decorated. Decoration should never be purposely constructed.”

+ What did Jones mean? Do you agree or disagree? Discuss in relation to an example of either ‘construction decorated’ or ‘decoration constructed’.

 

“Construction should be decorated. Decoration should never be purposely constructed”. When Jones argued this I believe he was verbally displaying his discontent for the design of objects which don’t illustrate their use. My belief is that when Jones stated “Decoration should never be purposely constructed”, he was displaying his belief in the dishonesty of incorporating life-like attributes to a unrelated design.  Jones disliked the application of additional factors to an objects design when there was no need. Believing that it was a waste of material, as well as creating a dishonest persona for the designer of the object itself, I deem Jones understood this to be misleading the user.

Like most people within today’s society I disagree with Jones opinion. The freedom of adapting/choosing your own style is important in today’s world. Many individuals express themselves through their choice in household decorations and furniture.

Furthering the example utilized within the lecture (the lamp, which was designed to appear as a flower), I chose to link this into today’s society and chose another light stand to help discuss the attitude towards design today. This light stand, upon first glance appears to be ice cream cones (shown below). I believe that this, and the light displayed within the lecture are excellent examples of “Decoration constructed”.  “Decoration constructed”, (referring to the decoration of the object being a higher priority than the use), is clearly displayed within these designs and within many objects today. The little to no connection between the appearance and the use of these two light stand design makes them perfect examples.

In Jones’s eyes the “dishonest” nature created by these light stands nowadays is simply seen as a creative design form, with a magic like attribute. Today the world is filled with misleading designed objects, however these objects are seen as intriguing, and in sense bring a sort of playfulness into the design world, which was once so serious. Perhaps as the generations have continued and the designing process as applied almost childish attributes to their design processes. As “decoration constructed” helps capture the use and transform it into a secret, turning the object into a mysterious one, thus bringing out the childish nature in us. This attribute perhaps makes the design more appealing in today’s world with the mystery of not knowing  fascinates most people, making them interact with the object, and creating a desire to want.

2. Considering this week’s reading, “Design, Society, Standards” by David Raizman and Wed.’s lecture in relation to the questions above, post a response in your DSDN171 blog along with an image of either ‘construction decorated’ or ‘decoration constructed’ (can be contemporary or historical). Be sure to analyse this image in your response and incorporate specific references to your reading and/or the week’s lecture.

The chair shown above is a prime contemporary example of “decoration constructed”. The chair, which looks more like a scrunched lily pad enforces the negative aspects that induividals, such as Owen Jones and Augustus Welby Northmore Pugin gained from these types of designs.

            Jones and Pugin both believed that ignoring the proper use of materials was both “dishonest” and “resulted in ugly designs”. Therefore the chair displayed above would not fit the bill. The Bloom Chair by Kenneth Cobonquue, upon first glance doesn’t not appear to have the structure a chair would need, with only one stand.