Color vs. Appetite

Color, and the overall appeal of food is very closely related. An experiment was conducted where people were presented food to eat in the dark. They all said something was missing, and the food just wasn't as good. The appearance of food is just as much a part of eating as the taste. The eyes are usually first to decide to consume the substance or not. If it doesn't look appetizing, nobody is going to want to eat it.

The color blue is rarely seen in nature. Although, there are a few exceptions such as blueberries, blue is not a significant natural food color. To humans, the color blue is actually an appetite suppressant. Some diet methods suggest dying some food blue or using a blue light in your refridgerator to decrease hunger. We have little to no appetite response to blue. This is possibly because blue, purple, and black were "warning signs" to our early ancestors, and were potentially dangerous foods.

Color Context

Certain colors have certain feelings, symbolism, and moods that are automatically associated with them. For example, red is often attached with anger, fire, love, intensity, etc. When I actually pay attention to the colors of certain objects in the world, I begin to realize that sometimes the colors match the object, and sometimes they contradict it. The two objects I chose for the best examples were a Danger/Propane sign on the fence surrounding propane tanks and a newspaper dispenser on the street. The Danger/Propane sign immediately caught my eye because of the bright red words, as it is supposed to. If the lettering was in a calm color such as blue, it wouldn't draw as much attention. The newspaper dispenser was a strange color purple, which just confused me. I don't understand the connection between purple and the news. Purple to me is a fun, playful color, which definitely contradicts the idea of a newspaper in my mind. Color is everywhere and it has so much meaning behind it, usually people just don't pay attention.

Performance Art

Many times, the first things that comes to a person's mind when they hear the words "performace art" are people moving in odd ways, or people who have been painted, or a small skit of sorts. When in reality, performance art actually involves so much more. It "can be any situation that involves four basic elements: time, space, the performer's body and a relationship between performer and audience." Performance art has evolved through the years. The influences of many groups have shaped this type of art into what we know today. For example, the Gutai group is known for showing the beauty of something after it has been damaged or destroyed. And the work of Survival Research Laboratories is considered to be performance art even though the performers are machines. Anything and everything can be considered performance art. It is just another form of expression.

When i read about Kaprow's "activities" that we were about to perform, I wasn't sure what to expect. As we went out on the street, I was a little nervous because the activities were very strange and I wasn't sure what the whole point of them were. My group decided to do our performance in front of Starbucks, and I soon realized it wasn't really about what we were doing, it was more about other people's reaction to what we were doing. My favorite activity was the "shaking hands" activity. It was really simple, but the thought of it made me laugh. I couldn't imagine watching someone else doing that, not knowing it was meant to be performance art.

Duchamp's "Large Glass"

Duchamp's "Large Glass" is almost too abstract for me. I feel that just looking at a picture of it online isn't the same as experiencing it in person. Everything is lost and flattened from the piece, losing all meaning. As i researched the piece, i read over a few thoughts from various critics. "Most critics... read the piece as an exploration of male and female desire as they complicate each other ("The Bride Stripped Bare By Her Bachelors, Even." pg 1)." I'm not seeing this interpretation at all. The visual analysis of this piece is very confusing to me. There are parts of it that people see, that I just don't. I understand the concept of it, but if I hadn't researched it, I would have no idea where to even begin interpretting it, and I know for a fact that my thoughts on it wouldn't come close to anyone else's. I understand that Duchamp is relating love to science, but it is still very confusing. "Duchamp invents the working parts of these two sexual machines, which are as arbitrary and absurd as the machinery of Roussel which inspired them. Their mechanisms are so complicated that they are usually accompanied by a diagram, which leaves the viewer feeling a little helpless (Mink, "Marcel Duchamp"). The only part of the entire piece that actually makes sense to me is the representation of "the bachelors." It is all supposed to be several parts that work together like a motor, but I just don't see it. I can respect the concept of it, and I think the composition is very pleasing, but overall, I don't like it. But then again, maybe my opinion of "The Large Glass" would change if I actually saw it in person.

Patterns

Patterns are everywhere, and can be created out of anything. This certain picture is very simple in color and style, but if you think of it as a single unit in a pattern, your impression of it changes. If this is flipped, rotated, and repeated multiple times, the pattern gets more intricate and interesting. This activity makes me think about things differently. Sometimes the negative space of a page can be transformed into an entirely different designed when tiled. For example, a simple shape such as the outline of an ipod with headphones can be made into a very intriguing piece.

Gestalt

Main Entry: ge·stalt
Pronunciation: g&-'stält, -'shtält, -'stolt, -'shtolt
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural ge·stalts also ge·stalt·en/-'stäl-t&n, -'shtäl-, -'stol-, -'shtol-/
Etymology: German, literally, shape, form
: a structure, configuration, or pattern of physical, biological, or psychological phenomena so integrated as to constitute a functional unit with properties not derivable by summation of its parts

Value Assignment