Hah… yeah… I know I know… I said I’ll be posting weekly, but I’m late this week. And you know what that means! An empty post! I do have some drafts and stuff, but come on I really don’t want to stay up and type. I really don’t feel like it, but it’s kinda happening already.
Maybe I’ll write an update and rant a bit.
So here’s the thing, I have some ideas that I didn’t go through, and I’m hoping I’ll filter a good serious article out next week. Probably about one of these ideas:
- Discussing the creative class’s value (and its perceived value) in Jordan.
- Ranting about how Jordan is gonna become Saudi Arabia if the education system isn’t changed from the core. By the way, I don’t mean like we’re going to get rich, I mean our culture is going to become more enclosed.
- Discuss LEED a bit, maybe even make fun of them for no reason and then rant about how I forgot to talk to my “superiors” about taking the test. Fack.
Now here’s the thing that kinda make this post worthwhile for me.
“All aboard the hype-train!”
Alright crickets, here it is! I am considering making another watercolor painting! Yeah! I know! Totally! Yeah! Right?! Yeah! Okay stop.
Seriously, though, awkward monologue aside, I kinda got excited to talk about the painting. So excited, in fact, that I chose to not go and take a picture of the sketch I made for it, because I was so paralyzed by excitement. But I like it, it’s a tad melancholic but I thought it looked nice and dramatic (as long as I can get some good contrast with my colors, I think it’s a challenge since I kinda play it safe while painting), so we’ll see. Now I just have to think about the colors and all. Bah, it does have a bit of that Vivi Ornitier painting vibe, now that I think about it, but I’ll make sure to try and give it a different character, and I want a different feel/scheme. So I think it’ll be nice. Hmm yes, it’s really coming together in my head. Now actually doing it is a different case.
I’ll try and start working on it this weekend. Oh maybe I’ll post a pic of its concept sketch along with some other sketches, to make up for this very well made post.
Alright that’s good enough, I’m sleepy (and very sorry for this post).
Okay I’m really not sorry, you don’t comment, this is a fair relationship we have, readers.
Unfortunately, this week’s post is just going to be a filler (unless you like improvised, poorly thought-out posts, then you’ll love this blog). I guess I’ll make it a personal one in a way… yes, it’s because I had nothing prepared, I apologize. So let’s just rant until a god point comes up.
I have been trying to make this blog into a serious one, at least every now and then. So I was for the past while discussing urban ideas, and just tossing my ideas into the bowl and seeing how they taste, but I don’t get any feedback really, not even if I share an article on Facebook. I’m almost sure my content beats at least some of the other blogs copying and pasting articles from other places. Hm… Well it would be nice to be appreciated, though.
I guess people just don’t enjoy reading much anymore? Or maybe they just don’t relate to random thoughts I put out here, I do think that urban planning/design is something that people have come to understand and feel quite a lot these past few years. Well my stubborn head thinks so, but who knows. But hey, I really do enjoy just writing things down here, then maybe in a few years I’ll come back and see what’s happened to me, what changed, and how my ideas are growing, it would be motivating for me at least.
This weekend was utter crap, though, I had a lot of thoughts, but nothing to write about, and nothing to say; I guess you could say “my thoughts were so loud, I couldn’t hear my mouth”. Yeah, I would say that’s pretty accurate, thanks Modest Mouse.
So…. updates eh? Been playing Legend of Zelda: Link to the Past for the first time ever. Go figure. And I gotta say, it has aged quite well, and is not bad at all. I played Minish Cap before and have been wanting to explore the top-down view Zelda games for a while, and Link to the Past was quite a pleasant surprise really. It’s not too easy, it encourages exploration, it’s fun, music is brilliant. So yeah, it’s pretty good. After that I’ll probably play Chrono Trigger since it’s supposed to be one of the best games ever, too, so we’ll see how that goes.
Been sketching a bit on the guitar, and I might upload some audio-only covers/originals depending on how motivated I am. I really wanted to do Songe Le Reveur styled covers (you have got to check this guy out, seriously one of the best musicians I have ever witnessed), but I guess I’ll just start with anything, just to get moving. So audio-only videos won’t be too bad, I think. Or maybe I’ll take a video and match it to the corresponding audio recording. The acoustic guitar does not sound so horrible if I record it on my phone, go figure. The electrics, however….. heh…
We’ll see… that’s the word of the year. We’ll just see what happens on the way, right? Perfectionism is a bad habit, but it’s good to have some standards, so with some self-discipline and initiative, I’ll actually do something I believe. If I manage to make myself work somehow, that is.
Well I think that’s enough for a filler post. Improvising isn’t so bad eh? I actually have an idea to blog about now, but I don’t feel like it. Maybe I’ll get it again next week.
Thanks for the read.
So, good news, imaginary readers, the Working Class Hippie is now officially part of the work-force: an Architect/Urban Designer. Na’ ain’ ‘at somefin’! That’s all for the update, here’s something I wrote while reading urban articles at work until I got a task. Might seem a bit redundant, I’m pretty sure I mentioned the idea of humans being just as evolutionary as other species, but with more complexity, so this piece takes on that idea from another perspective.
“The goal should be to use social/ecological dynamics that are flexible for futures we can’t imagine”
– Chris Reed
The past two decades consisted of Urbanism merely trying to integrate new technologies into its “normal/common” form. With these attempts, and the awareness of needing to be more “green” and environmentally friendly, our “growth” has been hindered due to having more to incorporate. We now know that the future of Urbanism is as complex as any living organism, and not as simple as we once believed as we threw concepts from the sky and forced people to follow them; therefore we need a lot of time until all the forces (of the many schools of thought – each with its own set of pros and cons) balance out, to evolve the city into an organism with its own logic and balanced existence within the ecosystem. This will have to be localized for every region in order to be truly balanced in its existence within nature, rather than a set mold of materials and borrowed standards; it would have to start as an adaptation, and must continue to adapt with the rising technologies to perfect itself. The rush to catch up with the other powers is forcing us into pushing through time while leaving many behind who do, in time, pull us back, as they are left in the dark, not knowing where nor why we are going in a certain direction (I would say the increasing cost of gasoline is a good example, despite the lack of follow-up on the public transportation side).
Colonization has failed to understand locality and mutated the existing architecture and urban habits into imported and misunderstood logic; however, with new technological advances, the adaptation is able to continue, since they can be utilized to more intricately adapt, and the technologies to survive with less environmental impact is available for almost every location on earth.
So based on that quote, I would say that nothing is more flexible than evolution/adaptation.
This adaptation would not only be based on natural forces, but ecological forces, including the forces of society and humanity. The organisms (people) that use the space are just as important as the organism (plants,nature, urban fabric) being affected by it. Natural selection would even be the elimination of that which does not allow our survival, such as bad architecture, poor planning, and technologies that hurt the environment; this already happens naturally within society, with those who threaten the well-being of mankind being shunned away in prisons to preserve the survivability of the species. In a way, all of mankind’s history has been a natural adaptation (leading to an evolution), as every change in the past was in one way or another brought forth via new technologies and discoveries about ourselves and our relationship with the world around us. In other words, adapting to new-found technologies and discoveries are a natural step forward.
Arguments about what is good/bad for our world; what looks nice and what does not; people’s obsession with Kim Kardashian’s bum and those calling bum-groupies silly; are all part of the natural evolution of mankind and our growth in tiny proportions, forming a larger image. While many believe a larger image removes our individuality, truth is, change begins with single units and changes slowly, cascading along the facade of humanity, shifting, breaking, changing color, and the waves created by all the changes are what propel us forward, all due to the tiny inner-workings that make it all happen.
When people discovered that they can cultivate land, they did, and it changed the way we think of shelters. It led to many of the early settlements being near a body of water in order to better sustain themselves. Now that we see green technologies that would help us better sustain ourselves, we should logically adapt and “go green”, since it allows our use of resources to be more efficient, thus allowing us to “last longer” [no innuendo here, move along…]. Greed, I guess, would play a part in preventing this adaptation, in order to maintain income for those with the most capital and benefits from the current systems that should naturally be left out, since they do not help the betterment of mankind anymore. There are discoveries being made about the surroundings we live in (cities, natural resources) that were cut off from Nature in order to maintain the “balanced” system that we are all living in, but these systems (physical and political) are slowly becoming more obsolete and are in desperate need of change, especially since they are proving to be hurtful to nature.
I believe that is how we should be viewing Urbanism right now, and probably for a long time: without the constraints of groups, schools of thought, and conceptual prose, but with logic, and a mind open to understanding the many hands that shape our world. It is an ecosystem and should be treated as one, from the smallest detail to the entire surface of the Earth.
Well I didn’t get the motivation to write much in the past few weeks. I have no idea what it was really, I guess it was more of a thought collection time, planning myself and building a little (not literally, though).
I finally felt like it today, though.
Probably because after saying that I need a good idea to rant about for so long, all the ideas ended up as drafts on my phone’s notes. Nah, today I grabbed my laptop by the buttons and said to myself “I’m gonna write about why I didn’t feel like it!”. Yeah and there you go! Look at me I’m writing a post! Ground-breaking ideas! Sarcasm! Cynicism! Correct irreflective grammar! Words based on logic rather than common words! Understanding by sense of the word rather than its true meaning!
Bah anyway, I really let myself go after that Vivi painting, eh? Oh well… again all ideas an no motivation to do it, but man I have a bunch of images in my head but I just don’t feel like them, I just feel like doing whatever I feel like. Sadly this makes the blog dead as a demon’s Sunday (+1 for the failed/try-hard simile).
Anyway, I think I’ll try doing something soon, I should, just something for the traditional art, other than sketches. I’m really hoping for a FFXII style thing, the colors in that game are saturated to the perfect extent and everything just looks so beautiful. I love that sort of color scheme, I’m a sucker for slight desaturation in color schemes, heck even in people; it’s just so nice and serene somehow, and as soon as a vibrant thing comes along as one of the many faces of people and images, it just pops out and really livens you up.
Oh, art talk… I have missed you so…
And bam the idea is out, my ideas are as short-lived as emotions, but never as lifeless as a buzzfeed post. So that being said, I have many ideas that I wanna expand on and umm… paint, with words or colors. I’ll try my best, since I haven’t delivered anything in a while neither for my ego nor for anyone who gives a flying pup about my work. Anyway! I will try ^ ^
If only the internet would stop pestering me all the time… STOP INTERNET NO I DON’T WANNA- Ooh culture-driving jokes, oh internet… :3
Well since I haven’t been writing much (has it been around a month since I wrote a serious piece…?), I thought I’d post some sketches I made, until any of the other stuff I’m excited for finishing are done.
Now, they’re not perfect or well-presented, just some sketches. The creature I was sketching ended up looking like a Twitch face portrait, only he has a cat’s nose and umm.. rabbit ears..? Oh well ^ ^ I like it. I also threw in a couple of recent face sketches and an old sketch of a guitar and a Final Fantasy-esque airship I made while doodling.
And that’s it for now. No Vivi Ornitier teaser yet. Until I run out of ways to stall 😀
Also dealing with adding media on a post here is pretty annoying I realized, I cropped one of the sketches but it just… didn’t get cropped.
(You can click to enlarge, by the way)
That’s all for now…
Been way too brain-scattered to do anything on here, really. The Poro piece hasn’t been touched in a while, but I’m starting on a Vivi Ornitier painting (Yep! A water-color painting! :D), just got the base down and all that’s left is the coloring. I’ll go back to the Poro thing afterwards, because I’m pretty excited about using water colors, since I haven’t used them in a while.
Other than that, I’ve been trying to make a logo for a while and it just has not been expressing the subject well enough; it’s just one of those intangible things that you can’t be so visually smart with. But, I do believe a more experienced designer would be able to to it more easily.
That being said, we’ll see how it all goes, as long as I’m not distracted playing something or doing abso-flippin’-lutely nothing, I will be working on these and continuing to look for a job!
What else… Yeah, umm… that’s it! Also, no visuals on the Vivi thing, I’m gonna put a bit of progress pics when I finish. Because it’s cool and stuff.
Just wanted to share this piece I’m making right now (which I’m pretty excited for! AH!) It just needs a lot of touches, additions, and a background. It just looks more menacing in the sketch, so I’m hoping to make it less “Large and cutsie” and more umm…. Threatening. But I doubt I can do that with Illustrator, I think I can Photoshop it later for a tougher feel, and I’ll post both versions here, too!
Oh, by the way it’s based on Poros from League of Legends, just so you know.
So I’ll just post leave these here.
Well, this is pretty much a lazy post I guess, I haven’t posted “on schedule” since I couldn’t really find much to talk about. To be honest, I did not want to talk about Gaza, because well this just isn’t the place for wars and that side of politics. Also I’m working on a “Poro Mother” piece, Poros being those adorable creatures from League of Legends, so we will see how it turns out, and I’ll post it here when it’s finished.
So I was having a discussion with a friend of mine, and I thought it was pretty interesting, he makes good points and so do I (I believe so), and I like talking to that friend, we have some nice discussions every now and then. So I’ll just post it because I like to have interesting ideas on here.
Thought you might find this interesting, it’s about art and well about what was “so great” about Andy Warhol (the guy who made a banana as a piece of art). It kinda relates to that sketch you found silly, but yeah, this is a really interesting read (these are all from a reddit thread btw):
[Quoting from a reddit thread]:
“For most of history, artist paint two kind of things: important things (portraits of kings, Washington crossing the Delaware River, etc) and pretty things (flowers, landscape, etc). Starting in the late 19th century, artists began question why can’t they paint whatever they want? Hence movements like Impressionism, Expressionism, Cubism, etc were born. Artists like Jackson Pollock took it to the extreme and created arts that consists entirely of splatters. Pop Artists like Andy Warhol felt they are taking it too far and wanted to create something non-traditional yet meaningful.”
“What “meaning” does 32 paintings of a soup can have? Isn’t it just masturbatory self-aggrandizement?”
“You can look at it as basically a parody of the commodification of art.
For most of history, paintings have been unique objects. Someone painted a painting, and that was the only instance of that painting, and you had to see it in its context. To see the paintings in the Sistine Chapel, you actually had to go to the Sistine Chapel and walk around with clergy in an enormous church, craning your head to the ceiling to see endless panoramas of the transcendant topics that were being passionately discussed there, and that context and location was part of its impact. Erotic paintings were commissioned by wealthy lords of their mistresses and partners and hung in their bedrooms or holiday houses as a major status symbol for their private enjoyment. Portraits of famous figures were hung in palaces and public buildings — for ordinary people, the only time you knew what the King or President looked like was when you went to a government building and saw his face 5 feet tall in a glamorous powerful portrait with dozens of other major figures, and that contributed to its impact and perception. Each artifact was unique, and most artifacts were made for a specific purpose in a specific context that contributed to your experience of it.
But in the 20th century, all of that changed. We entered what people call “the age of mechanical reproduction” — using machines, we can basically perfectly duplicate any image at will an infinite number of times, initially through film and colour printing, then TV, and now obviously we’re all armed with high-res cameras and internet connections 24/7. I could be walking through a field at 5AM, decide I want to see any painting on the planet, pull out a phone and be looking at it within 30 seconds. And this is how most people experience art — images in a book, images on a screen, reproduced prints, if they’re lucky maybe in a museum where it has become an attraction famous for its fame. But virtually never in its original context, and never as a unique one-of-a-kind object.
This changes not only the impact of art on us, but our attitudes towards art. Art becomes commodified — it wasn’t necessarily created as a commodity, but it becomes treated like one, we divorce it from its context and put them in the same context as a billion other artworks, just like products at a supermarket. If you go into a museum, many of the information cards introduce paintings or statues with their price, which is its value measured in the worth of other goods, equivocating Picasso’s La Reve with X number of bananas or Y number of shoes.
And that’s what Andy Warhol did literally: he took an image of a mundane commodity, mechanically reproduced it over and over again, put them all next to each other and called it art, because that’s how we treat art now. And in this way it’s more ‘artistically valid’ than traditional high art, because you’re actually viewing it in its intended context!”
“Or maybe he was having the biggest personal joke at the expense of art snobs ever in the history of the world.
… Or possibly both at the same time.”
I think some of the responses are dumber than a few of the worthless pieces of “art” displayed in lots of museums (I’m no artist, I don’t claim to be an expert, but appreciating beauty, creativity, ingenuity is not rocket science).
1. First of all the simple definition of art is, according to Oxford dictionary: The expression or application of human creative skill and imagination… (Focus on creative and imagination).
So when someone summarizes previous art as “For most of history, artist paint TWO kind of things: important things (portraits of kings, Washington crossing the Delaware River, etc) and pretty things (flowers, landscape, etc)” you can straight away tell that this guy is shit for creativity, imagination, history, ART, and brains, and skip whatever he writes next.
2. I sort of agree with the points others make in the next paragraphs, although the explanation sort of pitches an idea that artists no longer have options to create beautiful pieces. Although some artists do make creative stuff like:
3. Others are simply shit. The explanation made in the paragraphs only help/apply to Warhol’s concept (which is genius in my opinion), they simply don’t apply to things like these <clicky>. Compare that to this <clicky>
To make it more simple, if I ([bad] at art) can create a bad piece, and hire a pretentious philosopher/critic to write some crazy stuff about it, then make headlines about it, or if a 5 year old can create an abstract red line, then this is not art, and claiming that you are not looking at the context of it is simply lazy. Claiming that due to whatever modern technology or modern lifestyle or modern bla bla made you create such a thing is simply lazy. Here is a perfectly good example for that.
There is no art in laziness, it’s called being uncreative, unimaginative, not artistic.
It’s still another angle to look at art pieces: as part of a context rather than as a technical piece and you can’t deny that; whether you agree with its point or if you find it pretty is your opinion. But if it was in fact a conscious act to make people reconsider art, it sure as hell worked. You can say its lazy or whatever, but it did stir something in a society whether for being horribly silly or lazy (as you graciously put it) there is absolutely no need to do something spectacularly in order to be appreciated. So in the end it is only how you appreciate it.
The credibility of these people has absolutely nothing to do with it, they make good points and give you new ways of looking at things. So nitpicking at their words is well… silly really; I only posted their words because they brought a new idea to the table, which I tried to explain to you before: the context of art. Whether someone appreciates it is their own opinion.
You’re making this too complex for no reason, the idea of contextualism is there, everything can be appreciated in one way or another. I honestly don’t care what you personally find nice (no offense), I really just wanted you to see the other way of appreciating art.
That Joan Miro painting, it says it bridges “effortlessly bridging the transition between figurative and abstract art.” but I just don’t see how. But I did find this:
Miró worked with strategies such as automatic drawing (where the hand is allowed to move freely as an extension of the unconscious), Surrealism (which philosophically strove to reveal authentic thought through juxtaposing unexpected symbols and forms), Expressionism (which applies emotional subjectivity to evoke moods or ideas), and Color Field Painting (that meditated on combinations, and or fields of color symbology).
As for an interpretation of Miro’s Etoile Bleue the painting provides just enough information to stimulate the process of interpretation, but the same stimulation resists conclusions and continues to evoke questions.
Through the interpretive resistance of Miró’s artwork we are better able to witness our own processes of interpretation for what they are, reflections and projections of who we are—internally and as a community. And what we find is that who we are is just as unresolved as the image that we meditate upon.
So there you go, there is a way to appreciate it. The moment someone tells you that it sold for a bum-load of money, you try to understand why. Hell, if there was no google, and I wasn’t being lazy, I would have stared at it for a while, too, trying to find a way to appreciate it just because of this conversation. Man, maybe people do this for sport, I would have just stared at it for a long time doing nothing and saying it’s a lady floating to a door that represents the future or something, but yeah, due to its many different ways of interpretation, it just reflects the viewer.
Some could see a sinking ship and that woman is on it, some could see it as a silly scam and a joke, seeing the person buying it for millions as an idiot. Yet at the same time, maybe that buyer sees it as something else, maybe he’s high and sees it as something moving (emotionally or literally), maybe he sees its value as all the controversy that happened over it. Technical trash I know, but there IS a way to appreciate it, whether you do or not is your own opinion. Hell, if you think about it, it kind of reflected how cynical you are.
“There is no art in laziness, it’s called being uncreative, unimaginative, not artistic.”
Punk rock is uncreative if you’re into music, it’s literally just power chords, and is quite unimaginative in its lyrics because it wants to break free of the mold of society. It is pretty damn lazy when it comes to composition, too, if you listen to it. But it is music, and there are people who appreciate it.
Anyway, that’s an opinion, but that kind of painting could be taken as an impulsive expression or something, sure someone could try scamming due to the standards being set (hello music industry), but it could also be an honest expression.
This for example, is also not detailed at all, but look at how beautiful the lines are, and how they create a full image of a face with soft strokes. It’s an expression of beauty so it qualifies for art right?
But the technique? It’s just a few lines! Compare that to old paintings, it’s technically nothing, but that’s the beauty of it. It shows you exactly what our time is. It’s also not very imaginative, it’s just a woman’s face, is it creative? Well… not really what’s new in this one? It’s just a face.
My point is, every single thing can be appreciated in its own right. You see what you want to see in it. It’s a matter of opinion, and it reflects who you are.