Jenny Holzer Visit

So we went to the Jenny Holzer exhibition at the DHC gallery. A major part of the subject matter of the work (with exception to the two light installation pieces dedicated to her own writings) was based on violence, and warfare. It was interesting to compare the outcome of the use of the two very different mediums. When comparing that of the LED installations to the more subdued works like the 'Redaction Paintings', it seems to go rfom one extreme to the other. Although though I find both affective, I find that the way they communicate Jenny's message is through two very different tactics.

When looking at the 'Redaction Paintings', we sort of take on the role of the outside observer. Suitable that the material used in this piece being a map, the work evokes a sense of irony and incongruity. There seems to be a paradox in the means that the visuals are so basic and simple, coming across as benign and commonplace, almost friendly. But in actuality, the meaning or purpose for the plan/map is somewhere on the other end of the spectrum. So we are seeing and judging the subject matter from a distance, much like the aerial view of the image.

When comparing the 'Redaction Paintings' to the installation piece, 'Thorax', the viewer's perspective drastically changes. In the 'Redaction Paintings', we are persuaded to have the outsider's perspective, away from the imediacy of the issue under scrutiny. But in 'Thorax', with the use of the medium, I feel that we are put right in the middle, closer to the view of either the perperator or the victim. With the use of the bright flashing lights, in the dark, small room, along with attempting to read and understand the message displayed by the LEDs, are senses are hit with the effects of the lights, which at least for me, evoked a lot of tension, and anxiety, as well as immediacy. Considering the strong effect it had on my senses, and how it made me feel, it made me think of some severe interegation conditions or the stress and angst of those who are connected to the subject matter. This definitely affected the way I enterpreted the message on display.

Ribs 2010

DB1

Some more of the images taken for the 

found character part of the first assignment...

type(faces)

Finding Type (group work)

Most interesting: Ritornelos

Considering that there are a lot of fonts out there that try and fail to recreate the humanistic quality of hand-rendered fonts, we find that this is pretty successful at that. It doesn't show that live trace quality that a lot of fonts have.

Most despicable: RMFire

We chose this as the most despicable because of its total lack of effort when it came to creating it. We couldn’t really think of any situation in which it would be used successfully. And it sort of reminded me of really bad myspace pages from 5 or 10 years back. It's just really bad, and people who make fonts like this should have to pay a fine.

Most outrageous: Al Fragment

I understand that it is trying to be experimental but its definitely too much. This was chosen for its illegibility. Although some characters by themselves seem like a cool composition playing on negative and positive space, as a typeface, its so cluttered and couldn't be appropriately used.

Most ill-considered: Serifsy

For this typeface, I don’t find it aesthetically pleasing. It’s another attempt at trying to be experimental, but I think it fails in demonstrating creativity in the merging of lowercase and uppercase. Rather than really playing with the forms and how they can flow together, it pretty much just slapped one right on top of the other.

Most ugly: Ransom Note

Ransom note is another ugly font that tries to take different aspects of typography (the good, the bad and the ugly) and tries to combine them into one typeface, which results in a mess. It also looses whatever grunge bricollage quality that it was perhaps supposed to posses.