I think Robert Smithson's "Spiral Jetty" is a fantastic piece of organic art. It was composed on the outskirts of the Great Salt Lake in Utah, in waters polluted by abandoned coal mines. Sure, the artwork itself was probably not intensely difficult to construct, but Smithson had a vision behind it. It served the purpose of being "pretty" but, more importantly, it served the purpose of calling attention to the pollution and the beauty that can be uncovered with just a bit of work. Personally, I feel that the most appealing part of this work, is the experience. It is quite a trek to get to the spot, Smithson having chosen a remote place to place his gift to the earth. Once you make the journey, you are free to walk on the Jetty. This, i believe, is where the true art is. The solitude and freedom of just being there, of feeling the wind around you would be the greatest part, in my opinion.
I have read that the view from and around the Jetty is quite bleak. The mountains, colorless, the basalt boulders jet black. Colors, for me, do not always make an object more appealing. Sometimes, the absence of color says more. It speaks the truth, and leaves out the sugar-coating and extra fluff that most things have nowadays. Smithson may not be widely revered for his work of art, but i think that he created something honest, and without apology.
When Esteban was younger, he worked hard for him and his family to regain a status they once had and was hopelessly in love with Rosa. He sent his mother and sister money, which is impersonal and rather cheap, but he took care of them nonetheless. They say that absolute power corrupt absolutely. I think in Esteban's case, the evil was there all along, but hidden under societal expectations of someone in his class. Once he got rich again, he turned into a monster. He began raping women and feeling no remorse. He cast off his son and other illegitimate children, denying them his family name and forever placing them in the low class. Once he marrys Clara, he actually does love her, but his violence shown is off-putting to her. She, however, has little-to-no attachment towards Esteban, or anything in this world, really. Incapable of harboring many positive feelings towards Esteban, Clara only feels the bad. She sees what is wrong with the way he treats others around him, but when she voices her opinion, it only makes him more violent. The birth of their daughter, Blanca, may seem an opportune time for Esteban to soften towards women, but he only gets more angry as the years go on. He kicks his sister out of his house and sends her money, hoping that will suffice. She, however, does not spend it. Her point was made when he found out about her death and that she was refusing the money. He did feel some remorse for her, but did not change his ways with others. Blanca now was in love with Pedro Tercero and pregnant with his child. He is of the peasant class and, upon finding out about this, Esteban beat Blanca, his pregnant daughter. He then sought out to kill Pedro Tercero. He found him and succeeded in cutting off three of his fingers, but came to the conclusion that he would not like to kill a man in reality. That seems to be his limit on how evil he can be. How can someone like this actually feel little-to-no remorse for his actions? I understand that evil people do not believe that they're evil and this seems to be the case with Esteban. At this point, however, i think he's slowly realizing how awful he is, and I hope he changes it. People like him should not be given any sort of power.
When people discuss their favorite Beatles songs, it's generally an optimistic, upbeat song about something warm and fuzzy. I, however, have always had a fascination with the song "Eleanor Rigby." I have never really known why this was my favorite song by the iconic band, but now that I question it, a clarity comes with it. For everyone living under a rock, here's the song.
The song is simply so much different that anything they've ever done before. It was outright shocking to the people of its time. The song is on the Revolver album, which is considerably darker that the ones before it, thanks in large part to this song. It tells a tale of Eleanor Rigby, who is incredibly lonely and lives in a church community. Father MacKenzie is also one of the "lonely people." One would think that, in this song, the two may unite and end their solidarity, but something else quite morbid ties the two together. The Father is the one to bury Eleanor. The idea that she dies in a church sounds righteous or, at the very least, convenient, but is made more depressing by pointing out that she was "buried with her name, nobody came." She had no one in the world and her whole proof of existence was snuffed out just like that.
However, we are led to believe that she didn't have much of an existence to begin with. "She kept her face in a jar by the door" eludes to her being quite faceless. Simply put, no one cared.
The song doesn't tell the story in a sympathetic way, but rather matter-of-factly, stating the actions and storyline of this event.
It goes on to say that Father MacKenzie was "writing the words of a sermon that no one will hear... No one was saved." The Beatles elude to the death of the communal spirit in this community. Once again, it's so matter-of-fact that it's hard to question. These types of poetry are my favorite. It's the story left untold, the lonely people in this world and proof that they actually lived, however bleakly.
It was Andy Warhol who said, "When you think about it, department stores are kind of like museums." Now, this quote may not be familiar to you, but it sure makes you think. When you see Warhol's work, like his Marilyn Monroe Silkscreen, you can see where he was going with this. She was a huge sex symbol in her time, and she was very much commercialized. Warhol looked at her and said, "Why can't that be art?" He wanted to see the differentiation of the everyday translated into the art world.
There were people furious over Warhol's art, questioning if he truly was an "artist." Saying that different color copies of something was worth nothing. But that was Warhol's point. He wanted to bridge the gap between "commercial art" and "fine art," which i think he did effectively. He showed that one could be a part of the other. It didn't always have to be black and white.
Warhol may not be for everyone, and maybe that's what I love about him. His use of vibrant colors and his statements really make me respect him. However, after he was nearly murdered by a psycho lady, he became more entrepreneurial and cynical towards his art and life in general. In his book, THE Philosophy of Andy Warhol he says "Making money is art, and working is art and good business is the best art." This is rather disheartening for a Warhol lover, wondering if he was only out to make a buck his whole career, but I personally think that the assassination attempt changed him. Seeing that much hatred towards him, made him hate his fans and most all humanity.
Who hasn't heard of Alfred Hitchcock? He is an iconic director with a fantastic eye for suspense that nearly anyone can recognize. He was the father of the modern horror movie, proving that less is more in the gore category. He instead created a terrifying world where there didn't need to be buckets of blood in order to truly frighten an audience.
Perhaps best known for the 1960 film, "Psycho," his use of cutting the point of view at a rapid rate gave a sense of anxiety and fear for the subject at hand. In the famous shower scene from "Psycho" only a bare minimum of gore is shown to solidify the effect of the fright and horror.
His shots became iconic, the slow zoom away from Marion Crane's dead eye was a looming reminder of the her last moments and the fright she felt just before she was murdered.
Hitchcock liked to make movies about disturbing events or disturbed people. He himself having many fears and being obsessed with fear. He was supposedly afraid of police, authority, his own emotions, and sex. He liked to make movies about such fears as these as well as making movies that include bits of himself in a way. It is said that in "Rear Window" there is a character who is both a Peeping Tom and a voyeur. It has been noted that this is one of Hitchcock's alter-egos. While that is rather odd, Alfred Hitchcock did fantastic work and set the bar incredibly high for all filmmakers after him.
Rabindranath Tagore's "The Man Had No Useful Work" speaks about an overly efficient community where the residents are concerned only with their busy work. A man who has no "useful" job to do finds a busy woman carrying a pitcher. He wants for the woman to lend him her pitcher. She declines, and he persists. After several days of this, she finally gives in. He then draws patterns and lines all over it. The girl goes home and ponders the meaning of the artwork. She comes back the next day demanding to know what need there is for it. He assures her that there is none. She is confused, seeing as this is the first time she has encountered something without underlying meaning. He then weave ribbon into her hair, simply for the enjoyment. The elders of the community are unhappy with this new business. They send the man back to where he came from, and now the girl wants to join him.
Tagore addresses a problem that most societies face. There s busy work everywhere, but so few open minds and creativity in the world anymore that, when one comes upon it, we barely recognize the genius there. Not everything has to happen for the sake of something else. If you were to live that way, is there any end in sight? There is no enjoyment in that life, no appreciation or beauty. This sound like the question asked at the beginning of the course. Why do we take Humanities? We should learn to appreciate the beauty in the world so that we can be well-rounded human beings. The individuals in this specific community are not well-rounded. While they may be good at their craft, they have nothing else to fall back on. When someone shows up who may upset the calm, they feel intimidated. In this case, they force the people who are different out of their community.
Though it is the elders who have chosen to force out the man, the girl goes of her own accord. This goes to show that once shown other options, not everyone will choose a certain life. I understand this girls point of view, growing up to math and science classes. Then when I tried theatre, it changed my whole way of thinking. I now live for enjoyment along with the needs of society, instead of missing out on so much.
"Man is nothing else but what he makes of himself." -Jean-Paul Sartre (Fiero 76)
Most philosophers for hundreds of years have been blaming actions and choices on external forces. They all compel you to look back at your childhood or the bible for answers, many stating that the things you do you cannot control. This is why Jean-Paul Sartre is so interesting to me. After doing some research on Sartre, i was ultimately faced with two questions.. "How had i not heard of this man before?" and "Which way is he looking?" Despite his squirrelly eyes, Sartre produced a very valid ontology.
I would have to say I admire Sartre more than any other philosopher I've studied. Instead of placing the blame, he realizes that the blame is ours. Many would like to deny this fact, wanting a way out. With cries of "The devil made me do it," or "He triple-dog dared me!" there are few people who will take responsibility for their own actions. Sartre says that we have no predetermined nature, we act free and independently in our choices, and we create our nature and values as a result of these choices. You may think, what if you grow up with a horrible childhood, completely outside of your control? Sartre would suggest that you must take what you can from your experience and make the choice to learn what not to do and how not to live your life. This takes away all outside forces, leaving us with the bed we made, and the choice to lie in it, or do what we can to change it.
Of course Sartre realizes that this much responsibility would certainly impact humans. He says that it instills anxiety and despair. The anxiety being from the thought that we are responsible for every one of our choices with nothing else to blame. The despair comes from seeing the world around us that we cannot control, realizing that it is determined and that we hold little to no power in changing the external world. We are restricted to only what is in our control.
So what keeps us from going out and stealing or anything else for personal gain? Sartre explains that when choosing our human nature, we choose what we would like to see in the world. The old "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" applies. We know that, if everyone chose to act in an undesirable manner, the world would be chaos. Instead, we act as we should in society so everything operates smoothly. Sartre's philosophy is one of the only ones, in my opinion, that is really worth believing in.
