Blog assignment 5 (Colors)

The very first understanding of color was supported by Newton’s theory, which was based on mathematics and physics. In Newton’s view spectrum of colors appeared as the refracted rays of light. Being a scientist but not artist he did not consider subjective perception of color. This invention was made by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe in the beginning of the 19^th century – hundred years later than Newton’s theory. It was a great chance for artists to improve their knowledge of color through the experimentation and learn how to control color. The idea of using strong contrast was Matisse’s inspiration for his painting “Night café” where he is playing with contrast of green, red and yellow. Colors look differently and express not artist’s actual seeing of things but his understanding and perception. Painting “The red studio” is a great example of expression of after-image. It was also important for artists to find out how colors change depending on light. “The light which illuminates hues changes them considerably; blue appears green by candle light and yellow appears white; blue appears white by weak daylight, as the beginning of night.” (Gage, 1993 p.192).


References: Gage, J. (1993). Colours of the Mind in Colour and Culture: Practice and Meaning from Antiquity to Abstraction (pp.192). New York: Thames and Hudson.

Blog assignment 4 (Ornament and Crime)

Figure 1. Ikea. Green White living room. Retrieved from: http://elyounes.com/2010/12/14/living-room-green-interior-paint-ideas-for-fresh-home-design/green-white-living-room-paint-ideas-by-ikea/

Adolf Loos argued in 1908 that, “The evolution of culture is synonymous with the removal of ornament from objects of daily use.” (Loos, 1910, p.76) I do not support such a point of view. I think that ornament helps to make things beautiful and unique. What if we imagine for a second that people abandoned ornament at all. There is no ornament anymore. People are surrounded by dull plain things and surfaces. All the furniture, dishes, wallpapers, clothing, everything is the same. All the people use very similar or even the same things. That would remind me of an incubator. People would start losing their individualities. Everyone has his (or her) own taste and chooses individually things that would be pleasant to use every day particularly for that person, considering his (or her) preferences. He calls those people who does not share that idea “hob goblins” (Loos, 1910, p.76) which I think is too strong and even offensive. I think that good supportive argument can never be offensive. He says: “I had thought to introduce a new joy into the world: but it has not thanked me for it.” (Loos, 1910, p.76)To convince someone in his (or her) views person should first learn to respect the opinion of the views of the opponent, which Loos didn’t. That’s probably the reason why he failed. I cannot judge if he is right or wrong about ornament. Personally I think that presence of ornamentation can be rater good or bad depending on a particular object. For instance a on a picture above a piece of ornamentation can be seen, which in my opinion is quite good. Black and white stripped rug fits into interior quite well, supporting minimalistic style of the room. But even if Loos is right and ornament should be removed, then he was too revolutionary in his desire to get rid of it. As known, changes never happen quickly and people need time to accept and appreciate innovations.

References: Loos A. (1910). Ornament and Crime.