Formalism

[@OctagonalGolbat]

Thank you, this was super helpful. I spent three days trying to understand the formalism chapter in my textbook and all I got from it was a migraine and a list of names and dates. Unlike the textbook, this video actually helped me prepare for my seminar. Again, thank you.

[@philv2529]

I don't know too much about Literary criticism, but if it is anything like Art Criticism then I suspect that many times the critic will overanalyze and apply meaning where none exists. One major flaw that seems never to get addressed is the unwritten rule that criticism has to be of a certain length. What if Andy Wharhol just thought one day, "hey, I've got a cool idea! How about I make a film of a dude sleeping? How awesome would that be?!" And then after he produces said film (yes it does really exist), the art critics can't just print, "wow a film of a dude sleeping. That's fucking weird and awesome dude." So they have to submit something that is at least a paragraph long and sounds like there is some deeper meaning to it.

[@gopipo123]

Well, how can you apply meaning where none exists? Meaning is a curious thing; it is highly subjective and no true meaning ever exists. One should not care about the intention of the creator; rather you should look at what you can see yourself within that work. Sure you can say: "This is a meaningless film/text/image." but that is extremely boring. But maybe you see some beautiful meaning in there that corresponds to a certain aspect of your reality and that is where it gets interesting. That's just my take on it; a collection of arbitrary signs that for some reason convey meaning.

[@DarkAngelEU]

That is the problem of form(alism) in a nutshell haha My teachers tried to explain this to us, yet they had very clear ideas of what art SHOULD be. We started out by having to learn New Topographics and the following so-called Becher School (aka Düsseldorf School). The only thing I learned there is that "the best" photography, or the best art for that matter, is highly formal and that my teachers, despite claiming they love jazz and free expressions of art, they absolutely detested Abstract Expressionism and photographers who just liked doing what they did like Eggleston, Nan Goldin, etc. My dean even gave a reading at the Photo Museum, which was part of his PhD defense, called The Problem of Form. And what does his work consist of? Just walls. He photographs walls from point blank. That's it. He's been doing this for 20 years. And he's also an art critic who often applies his own theories to artwork, despite them talking about something else or being free from interpretation. Now I'm gonna write a paragraph that pretty much sums up my ideas, that the art world is full of socially incapable human beings and that is why there is so much formality involved (ie etiquette). But I do believe most of them are very intelligent and highly sensitive, and still they desire beauty in a world that seems very chaotic. It might be just a reactionary response to the reality but I do find it mind boggling that photographers don't show reality as it appears to them, just like sculptors rarely make work inspired by their materials. None of them do, rarely so, we all have filters within our minds, but it is awesome that at least some of us try to reveal that art is just a scheme that still tries to deny realism in favor of petty pictures that should portray these forms that occupy us. I can see it as one of the few reasons why Pop Art has been in decline, yet it is gaining a revival alongside Dada and other experimental art forms among the young crowds. The new generation requires something that is critical about society and its formalism, something raw that can be used as material for new grounds of a truly free society.

[@anneshasaha5334]

@@gopipo123 absolutely agree with you on this! We attribute meanings to events or phenomena, when there is an element of resonance involved. Not always, but often. It's different of course, if you're a professional critic, because then you're trained in a particular line of work. But commonsensically speaking, any work of art could be absurd to some of us, while it might as well be profound to some others. Reminds me of the 1957 performance of Beckett's Waiting for Godot at the San Quentin penitentiary. By means of introducing the play to the inmates, Herbert Blau, the director, had compared the play to a piece of jazz music. I don't remember the exact quotation, but he'd asked them to look/listen for whatever they find in it. I have always felt that this entire business of meaning making, is literature's, (and broadly speaking, art's) wealth.

[@muchachabonita43]

Thank you so much professor Math, wish you all the blessings

[@diljaanpb0787]

Whether it be irony y or paradox or tension or texture these alone or together do not a poem make? Do you agree with R.S Crane's critique of New Criticism? Can someone give full answer of this question ?

[@hadeel641]

Why did you explain new criticism before Russian formalism? Russian Formalism came first🥴

[@aroundworldnews]

وجدت ضالتي ان شاء الله