The Shape of Time was an interesting read for me immediately because of the stance the author took on the limitations of biography. It was very enlightening for me to read that "the lives of artists have been a genre in the literature of art ever since 1381," this was much earlier than I had thought it would be. Also, I thought his "railroad" analogy was very accurate and helped to put the entire piece in perspective. Overall, I got a sense that the artist felt that time is an important theme, but I really was not totally sure what the overall message was supposed to be throughout the reading. I struggled with this and did not come up with a clear and concise message even after reading through this piece several times.
David Byrne's entire book felt confusing and unorganized to me after reading through it the first time, after I read it again I got a better feel for the context and content of the work. At the beginning I really thought I would like the book, especially with the PowerPoint references, but I found it incredibly difficult to follow and relate to. PowerPoint is extremely relevant in my everyday life and it was eyeopening for me to think of it in the context of art. Although I would not choose to read this book in my spare time, I still found it interesting in the grand scheme of things. It reminded me that there is no right or wrong, or even rhyme and reason, for what art can or should be.
No comments:
Post a Comment