It is clear that Lillian Schwartz
was experimenting with her artwork using technology. Being one of the first
artists to use digital art, she was successful in creating art. I think that
Schwartz was just experimenting with the computer and making good use of the
effects available at the time. Some of the images she made show a clear outline
of an object but is using the pixel pattern or basic shapes to create them. She
did not try to create a complex piece but instead create simple pieces using a
variety of effects. It could have been trying to blend two images to look like
one or drawing simple objects.
“Proxima Centauri” (1968) is one of
Schwartz famous sculptures. It is a kinetic sculpture that was displayed in the
exhibition “The Machine at the End of Mechanical Age” at the Museum of Modern
Art. “Proxima Centauri” was an interactive, kinetic sculpture that was a globe
sitting on top of a table like structure. Other components of the structure
included a slide projector, motor, mirror and moving rods. Schwartz combined art
(sculpture) and technology (projector and motor) to create “Proxima Centauri.” She
used the pedal to start the motor and that would start the projector and
display different effects on the globe. The sculpture had a pressure sensitive
pedal that the viewer would have to step on in order for the sculpture to work.
It allowed the viewer to be a part of the sculpture and allow them to
experience a new form of art which now included the use of technology.
“Mona/Leo” is one of Schwartz
notable works that used the combination of technology and art. It was a picture
that merged half of Leonardo Da Vinci’s portrait and the other half was of the
Mona Lisa. The picture was interesting because of the selection of art. It was
obvious that the picture was of an artwork and its artist. It was interesting
of the selection of the piece. The Mona Lisa had a lot of theories regarding
the identity of the woman depicted. It was said that the Mona Lisa was a portrait
of Da Vinci. Schwartz’s “Mona/Leo” allow people to compare the image of Da
Vinci and the Mona Lisa. Schwartz did a good job of aligning the facial
features from both pictures. The nose
and mouth are two of the features that look like they belong to one image when
it is looked at closely.
The picture looks simple and it is
noticeable that it is two separate images. It is understandable that it was
made using simple technology but it could have been improved by making the two
images look like they were one. The Mona Lisa side was a painting and the Da
Vinci side was more of a drawing. One way of improving the picture is to use
two images made from the same medium. It would help the picture blend better. Overall,
the picture was able to accomplish the meaning using the technology available
at the time. Schwartz successfully created an image that compared the artist
with their artwork.
Works Cited:
- http://lillian.com/biography/
- http://library.osu.edu/find/collections/rarebooks/RBMScollections/lillian-schwartz/
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diLa2lig3dw
- http://www.vasulka.org/archive/Writings/EAT.pdf
Douglas,
ReplyDeleteThe story of Lillian Schwartz reminds us that experience in different subject matters combined with art great things can happen. Lillian Schwartz art was instrument in face recognition technology. This reminds me that the STEM Program (Science Technology Engineering Math) is adding ART to their program and change the name to STEAM. An artist ideas and vision can change the world of technology.
Carol Morris