Making assignment: museum

Welcome to the Maluseum! For 10 years, we have been creating experiences and sharing art with our visitors. We are happy to announce the opening of the Summer 2023 exhibition!

In Maluseum, we are proud of delivering apple experiences to everyone.

Apples come in different presentations, they can be red or green, they can be eaten sliced or in an apple pie, and so on. In Maluseum, we want to expand this vision, apples can be experienced in more ways, its not only a food, it is a lifestyle.

Gallery A: Human + apple = art

Gallery B: Chronicle of an apple (photo album)

Gallery C: Innovation, the apple concept

Gallery D: Wear the apple

Gallery E: The history of apples

Gallery F: Discovery through the senses

Gallery G: Cooking!

Come on June 6th to the big opening of the new exhibition, here is a small glimpse of some of our favourite pieces

From the French “pomme d’ambre” or apple of amber, this small object, often divided into quarters, was used to carry dry perfumes or small scented sponges. These powerfully odorous substances were thought to protect against the miasmas of epidemics. Worn on the belt, as a pendant or held in the hand, pomanders were an item of dress and crafted like real jewellery.

=> see this artefact in gallery F

=> Discover these pieces in Gallery A

=> Discover this invention in Gallery C

=> Discover this design in Gallery D

And remember the entrance is free on Tuesdays!

See you soon 🙂

Studio Visit: FIELD

I liked this visit (even if i got lost trying to find the place). The way they found inspiration from food was interesting. The animation with the noodles looked really smooth and was really pretty. I realised that I liked what they were doing when they were showing the project with the lab equipment. I personally hate chromatography, but the second I saw their design I though: Oh chromatography is pretty. Making me forget my hate for a process for a second is something really hard to achieve, and they did it.

Art & Fear: the nature of the problem

As the name suggests, the chapter starts by describing the fear of the artist: not being good enough and what I can only describe as impostor syndrome an the feeling of alienation to one’s art. It really tackles the (wrong) idea of the Artist as genius, as someone that was born with a divine gift for the arts. (this discussion actually remind me of a great essay called (Why have there been no great women artists? By Linda Nochlin)

This idea of the genius artist is confronted by 4 main ideas: Skill can be learned, ordinary people make art, viewing and making are different roles, and art making is something older than the modern view of art.

I’ve always hated the distinction between arts and crafts. For me it only feels as if one practice is less difficult than the other, when each one has its difficulties and requires skills. (In my opinion there is also a link of crafts being perceived as a feminine activity, but I don’t really have proofs). This separation comes from the difference between something learned and something innate. Anyone can make crafts, only Artist can make great art.

This chapter also go over the fact that art is personal, but does not define the artist. This also shows the importance of differentiating the process and the result, specially when it comes to see the roles as an artist and as a spectator. I liked how it explains art as a modern concept, because yes art existed before, but it was not perceived the same way. (I wonder how this concept has been recently affected by technology)

Lateral Thinking: Innovation and suspension of judgement

The books describes lateral thinking as moving backwards and vertical thinking as moving forward. Something that has been bothering me about these ideas is mentioned in this chapter: the distinction is completely arbitrary. vertical thinking can be developing and restructuring, as well as lateral thinking. For me, these two concepts are not even distinguishable in most aspects.

One thing that still bothers me is how vertical thinking is described as “being right all along”. I genuinely don’t think such thing exist. Later on the chapter it is explained that in lateral thinking “wrong” ideas are also explored, which is different from being right all along. However, I still think that the concepts are too close to be considered two different things.

What I thought was interesting about this chapter was how wrong ideas are explored. The way i interpret it was : ok it is wrong, but what if it wasn’t ?

Which I think is a interesting way of approaching problems.

Studio Visit: Robert Seidel

I liked this visit. The pace was slow at some points, but overall what he was saying was interesting. I liked how he showed us his watercolour paintings. I thought this really showed a part of his process, and it was interesting to see that he uses this medium as a preparation/ inspiration to do digital art. I also liked how he shared some of the problems he faced during his installations. I wished he talked more about how he dealt with the lack of equipment or the restrictions he faced. I wished he talked more about how he came up with his designs when he could not visit the actual location. He did mention it, but I wanted to hear more about it. I liked seeing his progression over the years. 

looking to the past (present)- making assigment

Why do we have monuments?

because we want to remember

why do we want to remember?

because these things are important

why are these things important?

because they define us

why do they define us?

because we changed after these events happened

Why did we change?

because we experienced something new

“why do we want to remember”

The idea is to build a time capsule for this year and then imagine what someone from a different time would interpret the objects.

  • smarthphone
  • vape
  • a used mask
  • someone’s spotify wraped of this year (last year?)
  • food recipes
  • a pair of converse
  • airpods
  • memes
  • tote bag
  • scrunchies
  • diary entries (without context)

“This civilisation is surrounded by mysteries, there are more questions than answers whenever we try to undestand their ways of living. For example, it is still unkwown why this type of bag was popular during the time, the shape is not useful for large objects and it lacks a way of closing them to protect the items. For this reason, it is believed that it was used to transport live forms, such as babies. This primitive method of transport is worth more studies, because it might reveal their relationships with younger members of the species. Another big mystery is the little block that produces smoke. Some scholars believe this was used as a ritual artifact, more specifically, in a special type of ritual involving the young adults to ensure the well being of the community. Another interesting artifact is…”

The way the mind works response

The chapter covers communication, patterns and it uses. It starts by explaining communication as a code, as a series of cues that are interpreted by us and that have a meaning. Since it is a code, it uses patterns to establish meaning. For this reason, communication is not necessarily a two way road. Humans pick on cues from the environment, we find patterns, even if they were not intentionaly put there, and even if we cannot respond to them. This makes me think of how can personal experience can present a problem for communication. Not everyone has the same pattern system, which causes misunderstandings to interpret the same information. I wonder how we manage to have a close enough sysmtem to even begin to communicate. I guess this is what the book means when it says that it doesn’t matter if patterns are worng, as long as they are definite. I find interesting the idea of the mind being a passive element of organizatoin, which is probably why pattern recognition is not effective all the time. Cues are ignored or misinterpreted all the time. I am not sure I understand how lateral thinking can be used to overcome these problems. I get the idea of the patterns to be “broken” in order to find solutions, changing the perspective to arrive to a different idea. But I fail to undestand how this could be a mechanism, a consistent one at least .

Chocolate: childhood games

Chocolate ⇒ Games, playing ⇒ childhood, friends

Hand gestures ⇒ languge, code ⇒ secret code among friends

These two paths brought me to something called “the f language” in Spanish. It is a funny way of communicating for children. The idea is to add a syllable with the letter “f” to each syllable within the word. For example, the name Kate would be “translated” to Kafa-Tefe. I thought it would be an interesting idea to pass this game to English. For this reason i “translated” some passages of a fairy tale, i chose Goldilocks, and this are the results.

“ wufunefesefe ufupofonafo afa tafamefe lifidefe Gofolifidifilofokofosofo afadafa thefe threfe Befeafarefesefe.”

“Shifi lefeifi dafaunefe of ofondofo thefe lafarafagefe befedefe -Thifisifi ifisiti tofo hafarafadefe- shifi sefedefe”

“Wefenefe thefeifi gofotofo upfusteferefesefe tofo thefe befedeferufumufu dafadifi befeafarefe grofoulederefe -sofomefewafanafa hafasafa befenefe slipfipifinfegete ofonofob mafa bederefe-”

I used the International Phonetic Alphabet when I was not sure of how to add the fa/fe/fi/fu sounds.

Lateral thinking introduction response

The book explains what lateral thinking is by relating it to some other terms. Humor, creativity and insight all share basis with lateral thinking. I think humor is often forgotten when talking about creativity, so introducing it to the conversation helps to expand the understanding of lateral thinking. I also think comparing it to vertical thinking, which is more usual, helps to understand better the concept. The analogy of digging a hole was amazing for me, it cleared out the difference and how both complete each other. I also liked the way artistic creativity was approached and how there is usually the misconception that creativity is a gift that only few posses. The book also highlights the importance of lateral thinking as a process sand not something that “just happens”

Studio Visit: oval

The visit to the Studio was interesting. However, I do not agree on most of the artist’s opinions, which I actually think is good, because it made me realise I had opinions on certain topics. Diving between Artists and Content creators didn’t seem like a great idea to me. I see what he was trying to convey, but I felt his ideas on creativity (and the idea of artists/ content creator) were limited to music. Which makes sense, since that’s his artistic career. I wished he had explained more about his own process behind some o his artworks, it could have been interesting to know, for example, where he got the concept behind his latest album, how it evolved over time and what he would have change now.