Friday, October 5, 2012

Vernacular takes me home

No matter the context, the word vernacular takes me home immediately. Home to a place where I spent countless hours teaching students that their "vernacular" (specifically language) was worth something. I find the definition Bruce shares from Elizabeth "the everyday, the unschooled, concerned with function" to be close to how I situate vernacular, but I also see the vernacular to be dependent on place (and this suggests an importance of context as well). For me, the vernacular is definitely steeped with function...it is practical...it is useful. I also think of it in connection to dialects and literacy. This literacy of the vernacular is housed within each of us (I might argue). As many of you know... when I really care about something my "vernacular" or my "twang" really shines through. I as sit here reading this in my head...I hear my "twang" because I care about vernacular, and I am interested in how visual vernacular and dialectical vernacular coincide. I wonder if this point of connection could be found in place. 

In another since, aesthetics take me to another part of home... the fine arts. I have spent countless years roaming the rooms  of museums and being fascinated by my cousin's incredible drawings that frequently can be found on the wall in a gallery around town in a show. Obviously, the aesthetic is very prevalent in my dance life, especially the classical ballet. Classical ballet is created to please the eye--everyone moment is a "picture." I too point to Helmer's brief explanation of the aesthetic  quality of art "These works edify. They please" (63). I think this encompasses the central goals of many works of art, especially historical pieces, Georgia O'Keefe's flowers jump instantly to mind. But, there's another element here; yes, they are pleasing to the eye  and engaging, but they also are awe-inspiring. This quality transfers to the aesthetics of ballet... there are moments that are crystalline, gravity-defying, pleasing to the eye, emotionally taxing and awe-inspiring beauty.  

However, aesthetics of more contemporary dance and much current art (especially some of my cousin's drawings) are not instantly pleasing. They are terrible in the best sense of the word, but they are still filled with awe.  These kinds of visuals still fit into the conversation about the aesthetic, but not in the traditional sense...they are beautiful because they are provocative. Within these arena of aesthetic, context becomes incredibly important, and arguably, so does place/space. Think about graffiti and/or street art.  In fact, I think the space of graffiti and street art could situate the aesthetic and vernacular as a pair within a rhetorical space.

Huntington Dance Theatre "Nutcracker"
Let's pose another potential connection between vernacular and aesthetic.  Can vernacular BE aesthetic? Based on the definition of vernacular, I am reminded of the photographs from Berger that chronicled the everyday.  This could also build into situating the vernacular and aesthetic into visual rhetoric. It must be situated in the purposefulness (perhaps the difference between the presentation of a classic like The Nutcracker and a contemporary piece of the "everyday" ).

WV Dance Company "Bottomland"
The two images represent the difference (for me) between aesthetic (as something pleasing to look at) and vernacular and aesthetic working together to function a a visual rhetoric sense. The second image is still appealing to the eye, but it is doing more than that.


I'm wondering if perhaps place and context work together. They cannot be interchangeable, but they definitely work together. I agree, Logan, context is everything, and I think visual rhetoric highlights this in ways I had not thought of before. Vernacular and Aesthetic in visual rhetoric functioned for me through what the situation calls for as well as purpose and context. Place is important here, especially in relation to vernacular. I'm also wondering if it is also very dependent on the audience or community that engages with the  visual in the space of the vernacular. So many things to think about.

1 comment:

  1. Molly - I enjoyed your response a lot. You asked if vernacular be aesthetic. My answer (for what it's worth) is Yes! Aesthetic is based on the spectator’s reaction to a visual artifact; so, if a visual that has vernacular significance is also pleasing and awe-inspiring to a spectator, I think it participates in both vernacular and aesthetic traditions. I remember in class we talked about how a visual, although it can participate in more than one tradition, usually is dominated by one tradition. So, this might mean that it would be hard for a visual to be just as much aesthetic as it is vernacular - it might always end up being more one than the other.

    ReplyDelete