AHVS 121 Understanding Visual Communication Winter 2021 Assignment 1

Understanding Visual Communication short response

AHVS 121 Understanding Visual Communication

Winter 2021 Assignment 1

This week’s assignment considers issues involved with approaching (abstract) art or other unfamiliar forms of visual material.

The goals of the assignment are to:
1) consider the myriad definitions of art, what counts and why that matters
2) to think about the experience of viewing a work of art/visual object as an active practice rather than a passive one
3) consider the issues associated with the case study outlined on page 3 of this assignment

Basic questions to consider might include:

What might it have been like to experience Voice of Fire in the context of its original setting (see photo on page 2)?
What might it be like to experience it now (see photos page 3 and 4; also consider the usefulness of the webpage information; if
you had gone looking for a better understanding of this work, does that blurb provide enough? What are the trade-offs between too
much information & dictating how people view something and too little information & leaving them without understanding?).
How does thinking about viewing experience (either original or current setting) change your understanding of it?

How does Voice of Fire resonate for you?
Why is it, or why is it not, successful in your informed opinion?

What key factors contributed to the controversy around Voice of Fire?
Would there have been a better way to handle the purchase? Discuss.

You are not expected to do any further research beyond what is here in the assignment.
This is about your critical thinking on the issues, not anyone else’s. Develop your answers as thoroughly as you can.

Write a short response (minimum 750 words/maximum 1250) submitted as an email attachment to ddudley@uvic.ca
Due: Monday, January 25, 2021 at 3:30PM.
Please see course outline for important details on how to format & submit assignments.
FOR THIS FIRST ASSIGNMENT – wait until after the second tutorial to hand it in as we’ll review formatting then.

mailto:ddudley@uvic.ca

Voice of Fire
as originally displayed

in the USA pavilion
Expo 1967, Montreal

Case Study on Approaching Abstract Arts

Barnett Newman, the colourfield painter, is now best known in Canada for being

the artist associated with one of the biggest art scandals in national history. The

events are concerned with his canvas Voice of Fire (link to NGC info) which was

commissioned in 1967 by the American government specifically for the exhibit

“American Painting Now” at Expo ’67 held in Montreal (photo page 2). In this

high profile piece, Newman referenced the voice of God speaking from the

burning bush (the blazing red stripe) as a way of commenting on the literal and

metaphorical conflagrations of the Vietnam War.

Scholars have since commented on the mishandling of the purchase (resulting in the scandal) by referring to:

-The responsibility of the museum directors, and their refusal to mediate for the public by explaining the context and the

visual experience of the piece; they would only justify the quality of the piece without taking into account that most

Canadians would never get the chance to see it in person! (the information provided on the National Gallery website

now was not available to the public in 1989)

-The responsibility of the of the media, who had a large role in shaping public opinion, by reporting critically on

something that most of them had never seen (not to mention illustrating it in 2 inch black and white newsprint photos!)

-The responsibility of the public, who, overall, condemned the purchase without making any attempt to understand it.

The work was purchased by the Canadian National Gallery in 1989 (for

1.76 million dollars). The Minister of the House of Commons Committee

on Communications and Culture said “It looks like 2 cans of paint and 2

rollers and about 10 minutes would do the trick” [of making such a piece]

and had the gallery directors brought up before the House of Commons to

answer for “wasting” taxpayers’ money on the painting. The directors

defended themselves by referring to the quality of the painting and refused

to answer to what they called ‘censorship’. Everyone had something to say

about it!

https://www.gallery.ca/collection/artwork/voice-of-fire

Voice of Fire
as currently displayed in the
National Gallery in Ottawa

Voice of Fire
as currently described in the
National Gallery in Ottawa