Lecture week 1 - Camilo Chiappe PDF

Preview

Summary

Camilo Chiappe...

Description

WEEK 17 https://anvaka.github.io/city-roads/? Psychogeography: -

-

1955  the effects of geographical environment on humans’ minds City: not just a place to live in  a place where to buy Consumerism cycle: working and buying o Derivé: lose yourseld in an unplanned journey, walking through the city  phychoheographical trip o The more you walk, the less you buy  not part of that circle Those psychogeographical maps  a way of empowering the city

Some examples of psychogeography: -

London, William Blake London’s burning, The Clash Wanderlust, Rebecca Solnit o A woman walking o The city has shaped the places you can have access to depending on your background o ‘Disclosure’ and the streets reserved to trans people

Amerah Saleh, ‘Tourist in my city’ (2018) Cities are human and there are very human ways of experiencing it WEEK 18 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kb38j6ejpsc&ab_channel=zerofocus     

noticing new things every time walking around the city loved the city, deserted characters of movies: past people, moving, smiling and going away the vanished woman and the space she inhabited  it was like walking in her life stream of consciousness  drawing narration from the surroundings strolling through the city

Seminar -

how Covid will change the city we live in? physical proximity has changed Covent garden  without the people, it is just a building! Why was the public space created? People influence and inform the buildings Do you dream the cities? The economic strength of a place (shops) is now its public health weaknesses Places where we are not consuming are the ones which matter  social > economical aspect

WEEK 19 The city is a body

Art critic of The Nation You can't say something's art or not art anymore. That's all finished. There used to be a time when you could pick out something perceptually the way you can

recognize, say, tulips or giraffes. But the way things have evolved, art can look like anything, so you can't tell by looking. Criteria like the critic's good eye no longer apply. Art these days has very little to do with esthetic responses; it has more to do with intellectual responses. You have to project a hypothesis: Suppose it is a work of art? Then certain questions come into play -- what's it about, what does it mean, why was it made, when was it made and with respect to what social and artistic conversations does it make a contribution? If you get good answers to those questions, it's art. Otherwise it turned out just to be a hole in the ground Arthur Danto...