During my journey through Johnson’s Art Museum on Saturday I can’t help but notice the detail of prints. In days that lack computers or modern photography, prints were used to depict realistic images of the world around them. The artistry, level of accuracy, and scope of these works are inspiring and I can’t help but wonder if artists today can become masters of prints as much as these artists did.

While I am sure there are some people today who can replicate the quality of prints made centuries ago, I wonder what is the difference in the number of the people who has this skill. Out of the populations in the past, what is the percentage of them that know how to make prints.

As technology improves, how many skills are lost due to their lack of usage? Even though the thought that there are an infinite number of skills that has been lost through the centuries is a little bit disheartening, that is the price of “progress”. I guess the art of creating print documentation is replaced by knowledge on how to Photoshop, take pictures with iphones, and how to take pictures under microscopes. What would these technologies be replaced by a hundred years from now? 3-d sculpting? Virtual reality landscape painting?

Our documentation of imagery becomes more realistic every year. With that realism, there is an increase in accuracy in terms of depicting what is real. However we have to be careful to notice that soon the images that we create are no longer just real but realistically distorted, ultimately painting an unrealistic expectation of what is real. Perhaps it is then we should look back at print artworks and realize what is real imagery at its most basic form.

Last Saturday I spent part of my day at the Johnson Museum. Although this was not my first time, it always seems as if I discover something new whenever I go. Although I’m not that great of an art “interpreter” per say, it’s always enjoyable looking at the different art forms, genres, and mediums. This time around I encountered a piece that caught my attention, particularly because it was a video. Semiotics of the Kitchen by Martha Rosler was first released in 1975. The video is six minutes long and portrays a woman in the kitchen presenting several kitchen utensils, each of which stands for a letter in the alphabet. At first I was very confused and even a bit scared, considering the video is played in a dark room with only a bench in the center of the room to watch the video from. The woman in the video demonstrates how to use different utensils in the kitchen which may seem odd in itself, but what makes it even more bizarre is that her motions are aggressive and, for the most part, she doesn’t seem to use the tools correctly at all. Like I said, I was really confused at first (remember I’m not that great at interpreting art) but once I read the description of the piece it made a little more sense to me. Artist Rosler, a well-known feminist, commented on this piece that “when the woman speaks, she names her own oppression”. I’m no expert, but I think she might have been trying to explain how women are undermined and subjicated through media, commercialization, and the “technologies” of the kitchen during this time and even today. Here’s a link to the video online in case you’re interested in checking it out. Perhaps you can add more to the conversation and interpretation than I can. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vm5vZaE8Ysc

Once we left the museum, we walked over to Rose to create some of our own art. When you’re so busy with school, papers, exams, etc. it’s easy to forget about your creative potential! I decided to draw an avocado. . . I named this piece “Avocado on the Horizon”. I had a lot of fun coloring it in with pastels and definitely wouldn’t mind more art sessions throughout my semester!

Last Saturday, I attended the Rose event at the Johnson Museum that exhibits early imaginative art, featuring videos, etchings, and colorful works. I was most intrigued by the intricate etchings of various styles, including ones of dark yet extravagant prisons, ones that served as political satire, and others of creatures. The foresight and practice required to create the image that the artist desires astounds me. It is difficult enough to create the precision of many tiny lines when drawing; but then having to etch out the negative space so that the print itself becomes the image is quite fascinating to me. While I could never attain this level of skill, I did find it very stress relieving for all of us at the event to create our own pieces of artwork. There is something about being creative and patient at the same time that is very rewarding.

After viewing these images and reading the blurbs that described each themed artwork’s imaginative technique or portrayal of a theme, I began to wonder whether one becomes inspired by imagination theoretically more easily much earlier on, or more presently. If in the past, less ideas have been explored, so a new idea is more likely to be actually novel. However, presently, after much more time has passed, much more precedent is available for new ideas to build off of. I realize, though, that it really isn’t important whether it is easier to be creative in the past or the present, as long as learning continues.