Le Monde symbolique de Chen Xuefeng, artiste franco-chinoise (original) (raw)

New understanding of the mimetic and the diegetic in the creation of art, Xi'an Academy of FIne Arts, July 2010

新的理解在藝術的創作 Until now, in the West, appreciation of the nature of art was derived from archaic and classical values. This was then augmented with the rise of modernism which introduced the ‘interpretation’ of art as meaningful and significant because of its value when interpreted. But new digital technologies are changing the parameters of the discussion about what matters in terms of the display and exhibition of art. By examining new ideas of ‘entrainment’, where immersivity, resonance, and synchronicity and direct response become the factors that reveal art to a contemporary audience, I wish to re-examine how an art object or event functions with special regard to the identity of digital high-resolution technologies. As the worldwide audience develops beyond cultural definitions presented by either East or West this paper seeks to examine and reveal new ideas and concepts around the production, distribution, exhibition and display of art. Here are the active links from the paper in the order they appear in the text: http://www.visualfields.co.uk/ANSELembed.html http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/gaze/ http://www.visualfields.co.uk/cannaregio.htm http://www.visualfields.co.uk/carnivalembed.htm http://www.visualfields.co.uk/TORPORTRAITS.htm

ICONIC_CATHEGORISATION_IN_ART_SEMIOTICS_TLGOBBETT_2016-17[tlg].docx

The idea of memory from the XV Flaming history of music deals with the overlapping continua, denigrated note to become a full experiment of spiritual listening in practice: what a truth action is. The conversion point of Moebius. From the text ‘Human’ of Cartesio published posthumously, to the environment for a philosophical thought of Croce in some aesthetic crisis (Anceschi) the idea of ‘tempo’ has taken in advance question of field, plan, homological issues to establish a scientific cognition of facts, deeds, thoughts. The discovery that the drawing master of Cézanne thought his elementary method of analysis (Cavina), brought in light the opportunity of disguise on mannerism more freely in the research of a fourth syllogistic call for arts, than before to let be possible the learning from the early masterpiece the Euclidian illusions of the touching corners of a triangle in Lisippo, its closure in a cube of the self of a surrender pugilist as well as the circular overspreading motion of desperation of the Lacoonte. Therefore, to reconstruct and develop some observation of the method of relief of the perspective of Poncelet, left overtly a possible explanation of the right of the fugue: the real setting. A purpose with a pragmatic issue, to seizure and code, which recalls Renaissance: the rediscovery of the Plato’s cave, as a good since Piero della Francesca. In a few years, some cases showed their contradiction and misfortune: the ‘difformity’ of Rothko, of David, and the ‘paganism’ of classics as Michelangelo. The disappearance of Raffaello, Leone X and Leonardo and the visual rhetoric of Tiziano as anticipation, or late, post figurative issue? The state of art semiotics though shaped in the continuous of the Academy of Arts, may need to inform cases of a natural light of recognition of the Second Wars, drag into revenge, solitude, the artists gathered in ruptures with the process for its ideological foundations seemed clear to all, from Pablo Picasso to Pierre Soulages, Emilio Vedova. Keywords Cartesian structures - Croce builds - Barilli’s generations Husserl’s scheme - The point of view deal as in Fontanille; Clock – unlock theory: Poncelet summary of perspective and fugue; Mark Rothko abstractions - Studies: Thurlemann - DaSilva reactions/abstraction as relief in composition – disposition – proportion, the reasons and the energy of the masterpiece (William Blake)

美术概论 [Introduction to Fine Arts] 2023-2024 SYLLABUS CAVAYERO, Peking University, School of Arts, Undergraduate Lecture

2023

This course forms the foundation of the Art History and Theory program for undergraduate majors within the School of Arts. It also serves as a vital bridge, engaging students from diverse academic backgrounds and equipping them with a robust basis for scholarly pursuits in the fine arts. In the continuum of undergraduate education, cultivating a well-rounded knowledge of the humanities is paramount. Consequently, attaining insights into art and culture becomes vital in fulfilling this goal. Within the School of Arts’ undergraduate curriculum, a comprehensive view of the fine arts takes precedence, involving a critical exploration of art’s historical evolution and theoretical frameworks. Herein, this introductory course to fine arts assumes a multifaceted role. 1. It lays the bedrock for initial learning, 2. sets the course for specialized studies, and 3. simultaneously uncovers the fundamental aspects and methodologies intrinsic to the fine arts discipline’s more advanced stages. Diverging from specialized art history classes, “Introduction to ‘Fine Arts’” combines introductory-level theoretical knowledge with methodological discussions. The course content covers an eclectic, interdisciplinary spectrum, interweaving historical and theoretical concepts with case studies, overarching themes, and cross-cultural and cross-disciplinary modules. Moreover, the course establishes a cumulative relationship with more specialized topics introduced to students in later academic stages. Some of the questions the course will pose include: What is ‘Art’? How do we define, understand, and appreciate it? What are Art’s diverse definitions, interpretations, and forms/manifestations? What theories or modes of thought can we use to discuss, study, or reconsider artistic manifestation? What relationships do art/fine arts have with other phenomena (i.e., concepts of The Artist/Author? Beauty? Politics? Popular Culture? Religion? The Body? Commerce?). What relationship(s) do the arts (i.e., Painting, Sculpture, Architecture, Music, Poetry) have to one another? Are there any universal understandings of art/fine arts (i.e., in premodern vs. modern periods, Western vs. non-Western cultures)?