美国论文代写：雕塑艺术
美国论文代写：雕塑艺术
除了Laocoon和他的儿子的灵感，Botha的“Prism 10”也让我想起了意大利未来主义者翁贝托·博乔尼（Umberto Boccioni）的作品，这是20世纪初期的令人印象深刻的雕塑作品：独特的宇宙连续形式。与两个雕塑相比，它们与被数字运动所排挤的空气相似，它们的形式与实际的形体没有什么不同。例如，看到波塔和波乔尼雕塑中的波浪状或火焰状的形状从小牛开始，并显示空气从运动中的身体旋转。然而，Botha和Boccioni之间的区别在于，Botha的雕塑运动自然而然地靠重力而不是像Boccioni的雕塑运动那样上升。其次，Boccioni的身体数字是非常立体的数量，而不是Botha的身体数字 – 线性依赖。当我离开博塔的雕像时，我的思绪伴随着贝多芬的和弦，伴随着风暴的轰鸣，以及来自板块冲突的隆隆声。乍得罗索看到博塔的棱镜10（死拉奥孔）后说了一句话：“你还怎么介绍一个如此与崇高沐浴的演出？
蒂姆·格里芬（Tim Griffin）在文章“世界的分离：当代艺术，全球化和双年展的兴起”中指出：“全球化是理解体制框架如何塑造当代艺术的基础”。
当然，随着国际双年展的兴起，全球化在二十世纪九十年代中期开始受到欢迎。许多策展人，评论家和艺术家都相信在间隙空间工作的潜力，以及他们之间往来旅途的潜力。这些乐观的态度随着千禧年的变化而变化，当全球化成为积极对抗艺术和写作的东西时，从扁平化到跨国公司漠视人的主权和环境责任。“
美国论文代写：雕塑艺术
Beside the inspiration from Laocoon and His Sons, Botha’s “Prism 10” also reminded me of the work of the Italian Futurist Umberto Boccioni, the impressive early 20th century sculpture: Unique Forms of Continuity in Space. Compare to both the sculptures, they are similar with the air displaced by the figures’ movement and they are rendered in forms no different than those of the actual bodies. See, for example, the wave-like or flame-like shapes in Botha and Boccioni’s sculptures are begin at the calves and show the air swirling away from the bodies in motion. However, the difference between Botha and Boccioni are, the movements in Botha’s sculpture are naturally going away by gravity instead of going up like Boccioni’s sculpture movement. Secondly, Boccioni’s body figures are very cubically volume instead of Botha’s bodies’ figures – linearly dependent. As I walk away from the Botha’s statue, my mind rings up with the Beethoven’s chord along with the roar of the storm and the rumblings from the clash of tectonic plates. Chad Rossouw gave his words after seeing the Botha’s Prism 10 (Dead Laocoon): “How else do you introduce a show so bathed with the sublime?”
In the essay “Worlds Apart: Contemporary Art, Globalization, and the Rise of Biennials”, Tim Griffin stated that,“Globalization is fundamental for understanding how institutional frameworks now shape contemporary art”.
Certainly, globalization was celebrated in the early to mid-1990s in conjunction with the rise of international biennials. Many curators, critics, and artists believed in the potential of working in interstitial spaces and traveling to and among the, These optimistic attitudes changed with the turn of the millennium, when globalization became something actively to counter both in art and in writing, for reasons ranging from its flattening of difference to multinational corporations’ disregard for human sovereignty and environmental responsibility.”
