CEV initial concept in Lockheed Martin design, showing delta-wing crew module (at right), with a mission module and propulsion stage (with rocket engines) for interplanetary flight. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶
What are current politics of participation in arts—in making, curating, collecting, critiquing, programming art?
How do power and social practice intersect, especially in transmedia environments?
What are parameters of diversity or diversifying participation?
¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶
Let the commenting begin! Append your thoughts on the above questions as a comment below, being sure to draw on any reflections or insights you have based on Module 2 resources as well as items tagged “Module 2” in the Diigo group.
The question about the current politics of participation in the arts is a broad one. As far as making art in a general sense, the politics lie not in the creation, but rather in the categorization and dissemination of art. Again, this goes back to the question of “what counts as art?” That question probably surrounds a lot of the politics of other forms of participation, especially if you are asking “what counts as good/valuable art?” Curators, programmers, and presenters have to make aesthetic decisions based on any number of criteria to determine what sort of art their audiences consume. Critics evaluate art based on their own preconceived answer to “what counts as good/valuable art” in respect to the context of the art presented. Of course, when we talk politics of participation, we can talk policies, funding, demographic information and so on, but to me the key question is “what counts?” Artists will create artistic products as a reaction for or against the answer to that question, curators and other presenters will do the same, and the audience will eventually consume art that has been filtered through that question in one way or another many times.
After Favianna Rodriguez’s talk on Friday about art and activism, this question has a new meaning to me. The interaction between power and social practice is really key. To me the idea of social practice (or, according to Favianna, the better term of community arts) is increasing participation and access. Power plays in a huge way because the reason that people might not have access to arts is because of power structures that exclude and marginalize them for a variety of reasons. Transmedia can really help community arts react against those power structures and increase access because the more platforms on which an arts experience exists, the longer its reach can be. It must be kept in mind, though, that just because something exists in a multimedia environment doesn’t mean that everyone can all of the sudden access it. There are still huge blocks to many people accessing computers, for example. It really all goes back to the philosophy of community arts and wide access. Transmedia helps to fight the power structures, but being ever mindful about access is the most important factor.
Similar to the answer to the last question, one of the parameters of diversifying participation is increasing access. Sterns and Seifert found in their piece that the access to arts and cultural organizations changes depending on the economic, racial, and ethnic makeup of a given neighborhood. This study found that there were certain combinations that yielded more artistic opportunities in a neighborhood – specifically racial and economic diversity (p 294). With that in mind, diversifying participation depends on looking at what might make those neighborhoods arts hubs, and how to recreate that in some way in neighborhoods that don’t share the same profile. Transmedia probably helps, as does identifying existing community arts programs and playing on those, or building them where need be. Just like Favianna Rodriguez said in her talk, many communities have thriving arts, just in different forms than mainstream, and it is up to the arts administrator to figure out how to identify those arts and vivify them even more.
You were the first. I thought I would make it ha ha Anyways…
I agree with your second paragraph. I think trans media is opening up new doors to access arts especially urban areas. That also rings the issue on who can access it. believe it or not, not everyone has a smart phone or access to the internet on a daily basis. I also think that it are these people that may need it the most out of any of us because they are being deprived of it. In the one reading art helps define us not just as a country but it could for an individual too.
Great thoughts.
The Cultural Bill reading was very interesting to say the least. I loved 2.) A Creative Life and how they used a term called “art-citizens.” In a way it is a term that one may think is exclusive. Like it is the “art-world.” To become an art-citizen you need to participate. Then rings another question on how much you need to participate and how one gets recognized as an art-citizen. Another aspect I loved about these rights is that sometimes artists apply these rights to their art but may not get supported the same as others.
Which brings me to the next reading called “Art and the Public Purpose.” I like how in this article it says the arts help define countries. This article really showcases what the arts does as far as our economy and our role in culture. It brought up a good point about funding the arts. We have a vast aspect of what art can become and how we fund such a mass amount of participation. Only 7% of artists worked for non-profit. That does make since do to the economic downturn and the fact the private sector pays more. It would be interesting to see why those artists work for not-for-profits though. To see where strengths are and maybe use that to gain more interests.
The last reading I wanted to mention was the Re-representing the City. I was thinking about this concept the other day. It was not the exact same way but close. Some of the best artists are ones with a diverse or have different life experiences. They are also the ones that need it the most to express this difference. However, the reading focus is more on how it is a diverse culture rather than an individual. I think the reading really connected with our discussion in Cultural Administration and what our projects could really cover for ideas. How it can focus on at risk teens or the elder. It also touched on how art education is schools is decreasing and it is the art centers or museums who are taking on these responsibilities. We just have to think of it in a new way. It is our social responsibility after all. All in all, I loved the readings for this week.
The current politics of participation in the arts seems to be a two party system: those who see the sustainability and positive outcomes of an art-integrated society and those who see the arts as a discrete entity within society that isn’t necessarily a priority for funding.
American culture is a transmedia environment with multiple participating parties. Through policies and programs put on through the use of government or private funding, curators, artists, and cultural programmers work toward an artistic ideal, yet no one seems to know exactly how to implement this ideal world. What “Re Presenting America” and “Creative America: A Report to the President” showed (and what most of us probably already understood on some level) is that the incorporation of the arts in society allows for healthier interpersonal relations, more peaceful dispute resolution, and greater political empathy, particularly in areas of diverse ethnic and economic backgrounds. I would argue that the incorporation of arts programming into schools, hospitals, prisons, workplaces, retirement facilities, religious institutions, and homeless shelters could be an indirect way to achieve greater political, cultural, and social engagement. In other words: art for all people. This concept is not new, but it could be manifested in new ways using transmedia resources. Homogenous communities could experience diversity through internet interfaces; art from one community could reach a multinational audience.
All of what I stated above is a theoretical ideal. I’d like to end this post with a quotation from Nicholas Chase’s website: “In my opinion, funding is not the primary issue plaguing the arts today, attitude is. There is much more to be said on the matter, and much more to be done. Meanwhile, it’s my opinion that the fashionable trend toward policy-making for Arts and Culture in the United States should be realigned to focus on real economic models, leaving aside theoretical ideals in favor of practical realization.”
The current politics within arts participation is an interesting debate. Politics within the arts draws on the controversies of how art is represented within a community and the concerns behind funding an artistic atmosphere. Art has an important role within society today and the addition of art within schools and community centers, allows the general public a chance to experience a varied and inspiring experience. As The American Assembly states in their article, “Through the interpretive and expressive strengths of the arts and of artists, Americans can much more fully live with change and make change meaningful” (The American Assembly, 2000 p. 65). I like the way The American Assembly phrased this last sentence because art allows for change and deviance to the constant variance of social norms in society. The American Assembly continues to establish the idea that art funding and art participation have been important when defining American culture. Art programs and events encourage participation and a sense of community within a society. Educational programs encourage critical thinking about a changing society and how this society can be represented through artistic expression.
However, there is a large debate on whether art is in fact a necessary addition of expression within our culture. The dilemma here is that art is seen as a less important subject when educating younger generations. But art is a way in which to explore tradition but also explore a changing culture, whether those traditions be American or from other societies. In “Re-Presenting the City” the practice of art in Philadelphia was a way in which to “contribute to the city’s social fabric” (Sterns and Seifert, 2000, p. 286). This means that the city used art in order to create a connection between the diversity within the city and cultural expression. Art is a way for people to increase their social engagement within a community and to express a cultural identity. Funding for the arts allows artists to showcase a diverse and changing culture, while still exploring the traditional aspects of American society.
We have entered into a sort of Wild West era of art. The traditional gate keepers are being circumvented on al sides by arts who are increasingly taking their work directly to there audiences by ways of self-publishing, online distribution, and online content creation. In some ways the old walls are being toppled, while others are being asserted. In the past gate keeper curators, dealers, publishers, critics, and edits stood between the artist and the audience. They decided what made it to the mass, what voices were allowed into the conversation and who would be invited to the table. Now anyone with an internet connection can conceivably get there work in front of an audience. However, the new gatekeepers are access and digital literacy. An artist who can’t get their work through the traditional channels can only circumvent those channels it they have the know how to use the tools that allow them entry into the digital free for all. In some ways the power structure has shifted from the social and educated elite. Younger and less wealthy people are able to use their digital literacy to circumvent the old guard, but these online content creators still tend to be overwhelmingly among the educated and white. The utopian vision of online content creation being the great equalizer hasn’t quite come into being, as old social and class structures still in many ways determine literacy and access. While online content creators may not themselves be financially privileged, they more times than not are the product of financially and socially privileged backgrounds. While money doesn’t necessarily buy you real estate in cyberspace, it does buy you the knowledge to access that real estate.
I am enjoying the readings as well and value the above comments. The current politics of participation in the arts is the current “attitude” towards the arts. My experience as an artist has been about creating something that is a personal and spiritual practice. Many of my paintings vary in the content and I never know what I will paint. My visions just come to me while I am in the flow of creating. I value sharing my work with the public and value being a part of art shows in the community to give viewers the opportunity to comment and discuss what was my process. This is important as it gives the community to connect with artists on a new level. The monthly ArtWalks in Eugene are important. I also value that the Lane Arts Council gives artists the opportunity to paint downtown once a month at Kesey Square for free. It’s huge! I can understand how accessibility can be an issue for some when it comes to an “Art Opening”, how do we as programmers assess openings? Can we video tape the opening and interviews with the artists? This information could be placed on the artist’s website or on the gallery’s website as transmedia.
What is being done in retirement homes/assisted living homes as well? I know we often think about art in the schools and in other avenues. I agree with Emily Ridout “art for all people”. Everyone should have access to the arts whether it is through television, computer, smart phones, IPADS, performers taking the time to perform in rural places and artists taking the time to visit retirement homes to offer art lessons. These are examples of ideas that I am thinking. Yet, I am mindful that there may be lack of funding for these ideas or that no one wants to take the time to build them into a program. It takes hard work and dedication from the community.
I like this passage from “Public Art; A Means For Human Development” by Alex White-Mazzarella, he says “We were animating people to feel motivated to try something new and as a result many people’s were raised just a little bit, but enough to see through a transformation. Many of these responses were surprises, but when things are brought to life and hope is rewarded, well, more hope is born. And there lies a central point to this public art. Hope! Motivation! Belief! Optimism! Unity!” This comment spoke to me since it gets me excited about my voice, the way I create my art and display it and how to bring people into to an art world. You never know who you will inspire to become an artist as well. Art nurtures people’s spirits. How do we remind State governments that Art is a valuable and socio-cultural (Alex White-Mazzarella’s term part of human experience. It adds vitality and re-connecting to each other.
What are the parameters of diversity? Should there be any parameters? I think diversity is crucial and important. We each have so many stories to share, songs to hear or sing, art to experience; therefore if each person is unique, that in itself is important. There is the opportunity to learn from each other if diversity is prevalent. It should be incorporated into every art program or art center.
This reading also made me think too. It’s from the Diigo readings.
Someone Needs To Say It. The Double Standard for Arts and Culture in the USA today – By Composer@LargeNFChase – Music to listen by
“For instance, Americans for the Arts reports “Between tax reforms, budget battles, and education re-authorization, supports for the arts and arts education is facing challenges on capital hill this year. ” (americaforthe arts.org)
“In Oregon, Arts and Culture have yet to be integrated in the Oregon Business Plan, though the Oregon Arts Commission has been folded into Oregon Business Development Department. This is a deeply disheartening issue and I think reveals again the disparity between policy and proactive that is problematic nationwide.”
Art and The Public Purpose – The American Assembly (2000)
“Imagination is the the key to diversity, to civic compassion, and to commonality. It is the faculty by which we stretch ourselves to include others, expand the compass of our interests to discover common ground, and overcome the limits of our parochial selves to become fit subjects to live in democratic community…It is only a mature democracy that fully appreciates these linkages.”
I grew up in a Spanish & French family. My mother was a tile painter from Paris and my dad is from Morocco. He is retired architect. I grew up around creativity, working in my family’s booth at 5th Street market and learned the principles of owning a business at a very young age. I think the most important skills I learned was how hard they worked coming from their countries to make a name for themselves in this community as artisans. It inspired at a very young age. Just wanted to share this! :)
The German Literary Critic and Philosopher, Walter Benjamin once noted: “There is no document of culture which is not at the same time a document of barbarism.” Yet later wrote: “No poem is intended for the reader, no picture for the beholder, no symphony for the listener.” What is he trying to portray in his mode of thinking? How has the continuation of electronic advancements and media improvements changed our thoughts on culture and the understanding of a society? Would Benjamin have thought the same today?
There is a very clear debate, through the majority of our readings this week, residing in policy v. practice. The need to perform or create art has greatly been muddled by the pressures of constituting ones self worth and value by governmental paperwork and trying to find new routes for funding. All this to say: it is becoming more difficult for an artist to be just an ‘artist’ because of the added weight of bureaucratic duties, even though the means of social media, electronic communication, and the like, do help to make these responsibilities easier and aid in promoting the creative practice.
Our modern world, most easily witnessed in large cities, is full of diversity and a vast range of attitudes towards culture, public engagement and economic distribution. This variety adds the spice and color to a social fabric and can mobilize individuals to have a stronger role in participation, both on a creative level as well as a fundamental, organizational plane. I appreciated Raymond Williams’ point on the two aspects of a culture, in this he mentions that the known meaning and directions of a particular ‘culture’ can be influenced by new observations and meanings. He links tradition and creativity as a way forward and, like Benjamin, both from generations passed, I believe, would grab on to the mode of movement in the modern world and think our current ways of understanding culture are just that: creative traditions taking meaning and direction from the past to move towards tomorrow.
The Cultural Bill of Rights: This title alone immediately brought to mind Franklin D. Roosevelt’s proposed “2nd Bill of rights.” http://www.ushistory.org/documents/economic_bill_of_rights.htm Looking over both of these documents I can see a direct connection between the two and how inequality and social injustice diminishes an individual’s ability to participate within the art-world, let-alone survive while doing so. Too many do not have access to the required utilities to participate in the arts, they can’t afford the required tools for their medium, or are sometimes so far removed geographically that whatever art they can/do create will remain unseen/underappreciated This connection relates to peoples abilities to fully participate in the arts. This is one key concept that often gets left out of the discussion.
Transmedia has the potential to alleviate much of the geographic difficulty, but little for the financial barriers that force many people, either choose between a rent, food, and paint. But again, what of those without the tools? It often seems that creative without access to a computer and is financially, culturally, or geographically displaced can often also be left without a venue. We can talk all we want about art being open and available for all, but there are many who do not, because they cannot.
All aspects of participating in art can be politicized. An artist can create art that is viewed as a political statement (whether or not they mean it to be one). Art can be used by those involved in politics or created to show the artists personal views on politics and cultural life. Curating art can also have a political element to it. The way one sets up an art show, who is invited to be in the show… it can all be a political statement of its own kind, telling about ones taste and ones personal views. The same can be said for critiquing and programming, they are dictating what is “art.” But there is a movement against such high handed ideals. People, cities, and certain regions are now dictating what art is for themselves. When talking about politics and art, it comes down to peoples’ views: if something is tasteful and can be classified as real “art.” or if the art or presentation of it is showing political views directly.
Power and social practice intersect quite often. The power to get people to participate in art and to be part of their communities, is nebulous. People may be attracted to be socially active because a person with influence (power) like a celebrity, a local celebrity, an advocate, etc is telling them to be. Transmedia extends social practice. You can be active in your region (or even the world) without leaving your home by looking at events on Facebook, reading the news online, or watching a report on television. Transmedia creates a whole new way to be part of your community (or any community) but in a very individual way. It promotes practice, albeit a very different type of practice and participation, but nonetheless more people can be involved in social situations from their own contexts.
Diversity is hard to fully define. To most it means many groups of people living together, everyone in these groups being involved in the community, and everyone being accepted as a member of their local world. Diversity can include many age groups, many races, different sexuality, different religions, or anything that people see as a definition of themselves. To diversify participation, groups need to go into more diverse neighborhoods and literally expand into more areas in which they haven’t worked before. If a non-profit expands into a fairly homologous neighborhood, they can offset this by extending into multiple areas with different types of homologous populations. In basic terms, to diversify participation groups need to grow, serve more people, and more types of people.
As mentioned in The American Assembly article, art is important but risky to participate in large part due to the attitudes Chase mentioned. There’s a shift in art being seen as less valuable in most state and federal legislature despite the fact that art has proven to be beneficial commodity to mental well-being, in addressing social issues, in connecting people across the spectrum. We now see a creation and rise in art organizations attempting to fill in the gaps – community based art groups, museums hosting events that are not merely about the art they house but about participation and community.
Diversity is integral to the cultivation and sustainability of art organizations. Though looking at Philadelphia’s economic make-up of art in Philadelphia neighborhoods Re-presenting the City reminded me of living in Minneapolis the past few years. I worked in Linden Hills and lived in the Uptown neighborhood both of which are known for being an artistically bent and later moved to Northside, a neighborhood whose existence most residents of the Twin Cities conveniently forget. My brother currently lives in Frogtown, the Northside equivalent in St. Paul. While Uptown and Linden Hills had access to establishments and cultural programming in a way that Frogtown and Northside do not (Frogtown and Northside both are more economically and ethnically diverse), Frogtown and Northside seemed to have more opportunities where you could be more than just an audience member but be a participant in the arts in several different ways. A lot of this had to do with the cities’ attempts to revitalize both neighborhoods and direct them away from the gang violence and crime that has given both neighborhoods such bad reputations.
I would agree with the point that Chase makes when he says that we need to switch our attitude from viewing art, culture, and related organizations as need-based and instead see them as economically and socially enriching.
I want to start by answering or at least addressing the last question about diversity. What I found in the readings and also through class discussion here at Oregon and in my undergrad is that the more diversity there is, the more likely there is going to be opportunities for diverse participation in the arts. In the article entitled “Re-Presenting the City: Arts, Culture and Diversity in Philadelphia” there are many studies that say that the more diverse or multi-cultural (keeping in mind these aren’t always the same thing) the area is, the more there tends to be opportunities for arts participation and in turn more arts participation. From my experience, much of this participation has its roots in the advocacy of arts for youths. Art educators for some time now have been taking the cap off who is allowed in the art world and instead introducing and educating those who have interest in the area, although there still seems to be a struggle. This leads into the question about politics in participation in the arts. I believe that struggle is one of and for respect, legitimacy and above all, support. The Cultural Bill of Rights talks about how not only should these “artist-citizens” should be allowed to “engage in a healthy and valued community”, but should be afforded the right to become one of those artist-citizens that the bill mentions. But where there is a fight or a struggle for a people or a cause, there is always a measure of success that follows close behind. This is found in “The Arts and Public Purpose” article where risk, becomes a stigma that stalls investment.
One last thing that I found interesting from the readings was just the title of one of the other articles called “Culture is Ordinary”. By taking that single, simple notion of calling culture ordinary and that every person is a part of some kind of unique group of people and then fusing it together with the idea of a multi-cultural area, therein lay an idea of a sort of subconscious participation in arts culture.
The current politics of arts participation is a rather difficult and broad topic to address. From a creation standpoint, we have the inherent right to express ourselves artistically. Bill Ivey’s Cultural Bill of Rights so genuinely and eloquently reestablishes that power to the artist, and ties those powers back into our on rights and freedoms. As part of the American culture, we have the right for free speech, and speech can be seen as a loose term for communication. Socially and culturally, we have the obligation to keep art alive within our societies, but those expressions may not always be widely and readily received.
This is especially true when it comes to controversial topics. There are modes of censorship, as well as other a critical approach deeming what is acceptable for which audiences. The art in question may have a significant and powerful message, but will not be able to reach its targeted audiences due to the restrictions that are already put in place to avoid and hinder the spreading of its message. Activist art and its topics can have a great impact on its audience, but that doesn’t mean that there won’t be political road blocks to keep the message from being spread.
In terms of diversity, I loved what Sterns and Seifert alluded to; that diversity is what happens when two homogenous (racial or economical) cultures meet. In these overlapping cultural areas, arts programs and other “cultural” centers are more prevalent in homogeneous areas. These cultural centers are vital to the future success of these neighborhoods and communities, and they “improve the quality if community life. They appear to serve as a catalyst for neighborhood revitalization.”
I thought the website article “Someone Needs to Say It” addressed an interesting issue about policy and participation, as far as how we perceive and treat the arts. The lack of support for the arts, through lack of funding, is making a statement about how we value the arts. The assessment that is being made, is discouraging artists from choosing to pursue careers in the arts. Artists are not the only individuals being driven away from the arts, because curators and art administrative jobs are also given low-paying jobs. This made me think about the Oregon Folklife Network, and how those working for the OFN are constantly under the strain of having to churn out grants and raise funding money for art-centered programs. In an attempt to encourage Oregonians to foster an interest in the arts, the OFN worked to create a series of events called Folk Arts in the Parks. These events hosted various artists from across Oregon, presenting in the parks dispersed across the state. Instead of having to market such events like crazy, it would be best to see our society change the value we assign to the arts. Rather than seeing the arts as this sort of “wellfare” act that only takes, the way we address the arts should change to see it as benefiting our culture more than it is taking away from it.
As for diversity, differences encourage the creation and continuation of art and art programs. In the reading, “Re-presenting the City”, it is noted that the more diverse neighborhoods were, the higher the rates of cultural participation. Part of experiencing art is celebrating our differences as individuals, and as groups. These differences inspire creation of art, and provide fuel for questioning minds. By situating art and cultural organizations in places of high diversity, diversity is encouraged. Individuals are able to see how art is a mode of identity creation, and that having access to an identity is beneficial for societal and individual stability. As I was reading this, it made me think about a Burns-Pauite woman I interviewed. To prevent the youth of the Burns-Pauite reservation from resorting to drugs, alcohol, or other self-harming practices, she introduced a program where the youths are taught forms of traditional pow-wow dances. By reintroducing their cultural identity to them, these youths were given a level of stability that other tactics might not have accomplished.
I am confused by the use of the word “politics.” Are we to focus on policy making and what is governed by various entities, if so, I was not able to pick up on this in this week’s readings.
What I can take from the readings is that expectations of how art affects others has relevance and impact on the American society. The article about the four purposes of Arts and Public Purpose gave some insight about how the arts impact America but can it be used internationally? The same goes for the Cultural Bill of Rights. Are these transferable concepts and how can they be applied?
The “Culture is ordinary” article makes a great point of how culture is created or cultivated (see what I did there). Williams points out there is a slow learning of shapes, purposes, and meanings, so that work, observation, and communication is possible” and “the testing of these in experience, the making of new observations, comparisons, and meanings” (17) When I look over this definition, I think of the language immersion schools we have in Eugene because there is a dual purpose of the education system and the child is exposed to new shapes, purposes, and meanings that they may not see at home. The survey made by Sterns & Seifert was focused on cultural centers or arts organizations but what if they did included immersion schools to be considered as cultural center? Would the numbers change for the access per block?
I am struggling with understanding this week’s Module as I have no defined culture because many of ancestors either deliberately let go of their traditions to embrace their new lives in America or they were unable to pass their culture down because they were hard working farmers in the Mid West? After working on the Module 1 study and speaking with friends, one stated that she has no culture because she was either not exposed to it or that she is made up of different backgrounds, no one stands out. My Grandma Payne tried to teach me a Swiss nursery rhyme when I was young but she never spoke Swiss other than the rhyme. (Which always embrassed her to share because it involved a monkey wiping it’s bottom with it’s fist.) My Grandpa Sanne never shared any German stories of his father and grandfather with me. He was a competitive marksman and worked in a planing mill but any traditions or cultures I have have come through my parents taking me to the ballet or theatre. Some times the cost was prohibitive because something else would take precedence.
I feel culture is for all classes and races and exposure should start early on it life. Politics could be censorship of an exhibit or what a community feels comfortable sharing about their history but monetary or education status should prevent anyone from going to a museum, opera, play, or art exhibit.
This line of questioning was particularly interesting for me because it raised a lot of questions in my mind about the relationship between art and folklore. To begin with, I was thinking about the way in which participation is discussed as being part of the arts, e.g. making, curating, collecting, critiquing, programming. There is something about defining art that-in and of itself-deters from the purpose of artistic expression. With folklore, I feel as though I’m studying expression that never necessarily set out to be artistic but rather seemed to serve a different purpose. For instance, when I was reading the Cultural Bill of Rights, I couldn’t help but notice that most of the language was surrounding the aesthetic value of art, parcelling it into steadfast categories. I agree with this document in that all Americans should have access, however, I also find issue with the ready acceptance of such stratified genres. I’m not expecting everyone to appreciate the art of organizing your clothesline the way folklorists do, but I do think that the political problems facing participation such as lack of funding, lack of interest and bureaucratic red tape could potentially take cues from folklore, which has survived by allowing expression to manifest itself through societal change as opposed to trying to nurture institutionally sanctioned programs.
What are current politics of participation in arts—in making, curating, collecting, critiquing, programming art?
These questions had be thinking all across the spectrum, so hopefully my train of thought isn’t too random.
When looking at politics in participation, I first define the word politics. Politics are the practice and theory of influencing other people on a global, civic or individual level. When we look at the politics surrounding arts we are seeing more and more that participation in the realms of curating,collecting, and critiquing is isolated to a specific class. To say that there is inequality in the art world seems to be a just statement as the exposure of the arts can be dependent on a variety of things specific to background, location, and overall exposure to how art interacts in one’s day to day life. When looking at how we within the United States participate in the arts, we have to really define what is considered art and do the politics of defining this hold true for everyone represented.
I really enjoyed the Nicholas Chase Blog because I believe he at least summed up what the issue of arts and politics is within the state of Oregon. Where does art stand in the priority of politics? From the look of it, there doesn’t seem to be a huge priority of arts participation and “culture-building” for the arts. We know that there was time when politics went out of there way to ensure that funding to the arts would be stripped (insert Ronald Reagan). From this very action set the tone for the next few decades of how arts funding has decreased not only in private sectors and nonprofits but in our educational accessibility as well.
Culture building is a term that Nicholas Chase co-opted from Europe, referring to ” any action by which culture is fostered, including legislation, funding, outreach (awareness-building), education, and community forging endeavors”. Sadly, the value of the arts in schools and our current spheres of how we interact with art has diminished. Most places that provide accessibility to the arts such as museums, galleries or community centers are supported by a small pool of generous donors that value the preservation of arts in society. By in large however, the general public does not pay to keep these spaces running. When we truly are left to look at the monetary value we place on arts in culture, we are left holding large bags of empty promises and little to no sustainable funding options.
Further more the problem can only be perpetuated when living artists aren’t given opportunity to succeed because of the small amount of value we place on culture building in the United States. Being a self employed artist at one time, there was no actual possibility for me to save for any continuing education for my art because I was constantly needing to book gigs, create class curriculum and market myself. The starving artist dream is alive and well, and it is not coincidence either that by not prioritizing the art in public policy, we perpetuate this image and stigma around becoming an artist.
How do power and social practice intersect, especially in transmedia environments?
Social practice and power intersect. Social practice is another term for community engagement or participation. When looking at this question, I immediately looked towards the keynote speaker we had at the reunion, Favianna Rodriguez. When we recognize the amount of injustice happening in our world today we begin to see just how important community engagement can be to breaking down the constructs of these power structures that have been set forth. Transmedia provides a platforms for artists and individuals to openly move, touched and inspired emotions that shake the very platforms of power structures that we have been set on for so long dealing with issues of race, gender, and economic inequalities (just to name a few). By doing so, we shift the power to those who truly need to be empowered. Transmedia is an ever changing platform that allows everyone some point of accessibility. As we begin to shift our current paradigm we will continue to see transmedia activists that use all forms of communication to spread their messages as Favianna has done with such fierceness but grace in their political passion projects and causes.
http://creativemornings.com/talks/street-etiquette/1
Awesome video how transmedia can allow for relation. Regardless of the fact that these artists from street etiquette are from a developed country, they were able to take the cultural melting pot of the bronx and relate it to the cultural melting pot of the places they visited. That alone creates power. When you can thin the lines of any type of social construct that has been defined but allowing humans to relate on a soul artistic level, not on a societal level, power truly shifts and social practice finally begins.
What are parameters of diversity or diversifying participation?
The idea of diversifying participation lies within ones ability to explore the multiple avenues in which we can participate. When I look at this question, I immediately think of Burning Man. Why? Because burning man allows for multiple ways in which someone can participate. You can go just as you are, a paying patron who has put resources together to have the biggest party you can ever imagine. Sounds like fun, but are you fully participating or just merely attending? You can also step onto the Playa and offer a workshop where individuals can directly participate in what you facilitate. You can create an art installation, which not only allows for participation in advance for those who are constructing the installation but can be created as such so that those that experience the installation on the playa can climb and interact with this art. You become the director of your participation at burning man, and choose your acts that best serve you. When you create and offer something tangible at burning man, you are essentially facilitating others participation by your creations, which essentially is diversifying peoples ability to participate.
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/412248231/the-lost-tea-party-honorarium-art-project-burning
*lost tea party, where those who created this installation participate through creation and those who are able to interact with the tea party, participation through interactio*)
http://www.rilcombs.com/Photography/BurningMan/i-SmqJGJC/A (copy and paste link to see the tea pots in full effect!)
I think the parameters of “culture” and “diversity” in today’s society are quite similar. People believe that culture is something that can be defined and determined by a set of rules, as diversity is also defined by within universities, museums, etc. I rather enjoyed the article, “Culture is Ordinary,” as I also enjoyed this phrase. I believe that “culture” and “diversity” are things that should be considered as an inherent part of society, not something separate. As the article, “Re-presenting the City: Arts, Culture, and Diversity in Philadelphia,” said, social interaction among individuals of diverse backgrounds can help dissolve caste systems and create an acceptance of insecurity and instability. While I agree with this statement, not all societies are going to be blessed with “diversity” of ethnic, religious, and historical backgrounds. I do not believe that it is something that should always be sought out; diversity can be found in any neighborhood if one looks hard enough. Culture is the same way. Culture is something that is ordinary and exists in everyday life. While we, myself included, have a fascination with cultures not our own, we forget that we also have identifiable acts of “culture” that are normal to us but not to others. I think it becomes difficult to label “culture” and “diversity” within the parameters existing today after we accept that these two terms are normal and not always something that can be defined. As cultural workers, I believe we should work at reminding communities and cultural institutions that diversity and cultural engagement cannot be defined as singular groups or activities that exist separate from the rest of the world.
We would all like to believe that art-making is not plagued by politics which dictate how, where, why and by whom artwork can be made and disseminated. In an ideal art world everyone would be able have opportunity and access to the “Cultural Bill of Rights” and the idea that culture is ordinary and that it is intended for everyone, but unfortunately art in society is much more convoluted. Both Ivey and the American Assembly provided perspectives on the politics of ownership and participation of the arts that seem idealized in many ways. The American Assembly dictated arts participation as a treasured American activity that defines American identity, contributes to quality of life, provides education and awareness and enhances the lives of individuals (pp. 66-67). This creates a cookie-cutter picture of how we envision art in society. Politics dictate that art making, art exploration, art collecting and critiquing is the right of anyone who chooses to do so. On the other hand, reality demonstrates that participation through all of these areas is effected by many visible and invisible elements such as access, education and understanding, funding limitations, censorship, cultural perceptions and expectations, and ideologies about who should be allowed to access culture as well as definitions of art and culture. Williams and Stern, on the other hand, provided more analytical responses to art and culture by focusing on specific complications in regards to cultural perceptions as well as segregation between urban arts and culture sectors and certain city neighborhoods that lack diversity. Based on these readings, it seems that current politics may try to paint a prettier picture of arts in culture in America than what actually exists. The reality is that current politics of participation in the arts are much more complicated, especially in regards to understanding of and access to arts and culture.
I am thinking a lot about this question in relation to community cultural development, and how social practice and social change can often be deterred by institutions, people or concepts in power. This may be power in the hands of a community unwilling to allow change or that is fearful of change. In attempting to help them improve their community, one must understand that that it is the community that still holds the power. One cannot change what is unwilling to change. Power can take an especially strong hold over marginalized communities that are impoverished or uneducated. In trans-media environments, those who have privilege have the power. This simply comes down to material resources, education and access. In “The Arts and the Public Purpose,” the American Assembly discussed how “electronic experience has become the dominant form for participation in the arts” and that the “media are the primary means of distribution” (p. 69). What does this mean for those people who live in places without access to media?
Arts and culture thrive in diversity, as Stern and Seifert mentioned often throughout “Re-Representing the City.” This reading touched on the relationship between arts and culture and diversity in Philadelphia but it provided a great example of how the two might live together elsewhere. Diversity is delicate, especially in city-systems where anonymity and lack of personal connection break down the possibility for integration of cultures and identities (p 286). Diversity requires that participants step outside of a comfort zone in order to engage and this can be very difficult to achieve. Many communities are very hesitant to accept diversification as this can effect traditions and identities that have been grounded for a long time. This is where knowing the difference between cultural place-making and cultural place-keeping comes into play. There must be a balance in creating diversity while also keeping the elements essential to community identity. It is also interesting that arts and culture organizations concentrate in areas of diversity, therefore, segregating arts and culture and a stimulus for diversity from other communities and neighborhoods. If arts and culture is only allowed to exist in areas where it has already made a home, how will it ever influence the spread of diversity?
Art is not a sole field that be separated from other fields. Undeniably, artists express their individual feeling through artistic works. But, we also affirm that art is associated with polity, a kind of bidirectional association. Just like professor Patricia said in class, polity influence arts and artists also have responsibility to reflect polity. Before reading Assembly’s material of the arts and the public purpose, I thought polity influence arts more than arts do. But after reading this material I fond I had wrong idea. They are intersectant relationship.
First of all, generally speaking creating arts work should have resource. So arts encourage association, which provide us much opportunity to communicate and come up with many ideas. On the one hand, arts beginning with life and can’t be existed without foundation. Some issues and topics of current polity will accelerate the production of art works. On the other hand, arts can reflect democracy, especially in transmedia environment, arts like a bridge of culture to link and broadcast culture of all over the world including polity of course. Further more, I agree with Williams,R.’s opinion “culture is ordinary” , even though culture is changing. He says a culture has two aspect: the know meanings and directions; the new observations and meanings. In every society and every mind, culture is ordinary. So don’t be scared from the things by noises.
Secondly, creating art is good for better life, because it will bring economic increasing. Except for art works can spirit people, this field also offer many job opportunity. Creating an artistic production needs a team to finish, not only just an artist, so it also need some people to work together even though they are not good at art. For example, making film is a huge and complicated art work, it provides many jobs except director, actors, cameras those must have professional knowledge, it also needs drivers, extra, set medic, etc. Every time when film in the end we could see many people’s name on screen, which means to create art work will come into being many jobs, people have economic income that is good for country development. In other words, it is helpful to political stability. Besides, with the development of society, commercial art is becoming more and more important. Nowadays, many commercial arts organizations create business elements art productions, which is more popular in marketing, especially they can use tranmedia approaches to sell products all over the world, it is a global era.
In addition, art promote education. In childhood all we took art classes, which maybe the first time we touched art. According to hobby, many children choose different art classes to take, such as dancing, drawing, playing piano and so on. Through participate art classes, children will find what exactly field they love, and then go to university to study deeper art knowledge, just like us. Education is one of the most concerned problems in the world. Art is helpful to education means art is good for people’s livelihood.
In reading material refer a research about 1992 “Survey of Public Participation in Arts”. It reports only 43 percent experienced arts in person, electronic experience has become the dominant way of participation in the arts. Because of global reach, there are many effective ways to provide information. The development of transmedia is also good for fundraising and building audiences and membership.
Nowadays, the politics of participation in arts are more extensive and prevalent. In Italy，the government in order to reflect democratization of per capita, they could be used to illustrate the choir area. This artistic did not singing because is can improve the efficiency of the government. Arts has more positive impact for political. Arts can promote civic participation and generate the social costs for country, while also solving pressing social concerns. For example, in today the United States are concerned about the “double non-immigration” problem, which means parents are not American nationality, but the child was born in the United States.The United States 24 Republican Congressman asked Congress to interpret the Constitution Fourteenth Amendment and stated although born in the United States, these babies can not enjoy the United States citizenship which babies born in the United States, but his or her parents were non-US citizens.
When I went to visit the White House, I see a lot of social organizations in front of the White House performed the street performers and show their protest theme. More than ten children in the chorus songs, someone holding a sign showing their theme, surrounding also placed to the photos. They use the roadshow way to express their attitude towards of the “double non-immigration”.
In the art of making, planning and other aspects, such as Appalshop’s Roadside Theater, the local audience provide some stories as materials for performances. Choirs and Baltimore American Art Association to find a local audience to participate by making the formation group.
Citizen participation also impacted of the arts which reflected in the Artists vote at higher rates than the general public, according to the article “The Arts and Social Capital: The Saguaro Seminars” shows that the artists is more likely to get votes than the general citizen, which means that the if the artists in politics, they will get political vote will be relatively high, or when competition among the political parties to win the votes, some well-know artists will be find to help candidate speech， so it can obtain voting citizens.
In China, our Chinese First Lady Ms. Peng which is the wife of current Chinese leader Xi Jinping has highest voice of the people over the past years and also get highest attention of foreign media. Ms. Peng accompany with General Secretary Xi to visit, wherever he went, the local media will have a special interviews and reports for her. I think all these support and attention both because Ms. Peng is an excellent singing artist which has a high profile and positive image. Her master work both to sing the motherland and people which were win the hearts of all.
I believe that the artistic beauty is just universal and interlink. From Ms. Peng ’s visibility and degree of concern, is not difficult to see that China is transitioning of the diplomatic and political. Not any more a single form and method, now is taking a diversity political and diplomatic way.
Art world is diversity and wonderful. Art has its acceptance, recognizing and inspiring every unique character. As the article said some social and cultural communities and organizations usually build in ethnically and economically diverse areas. “Heterogeneity” and “tolerance” are essential to urban life. Diverse “neighborhoods” are the engine of economic revitalization for urban communities. Studies stated that where has more racially and economical diversity, where has more impossible for social participation for organization. People with different payment status and educational levels are a good wellspring for diversifying participation. Diversity including all sorts of art factors: art-making, exhibiting, appreciating or critiquing. And parameters of diversity or diversifying participation usually refer to racial or economical-based factor. Through the research in Philadelphia，it is noted that mixed cultural and racial areas have more cultural participatory activities. Diversity art life provides people high-quality life. A good quality life is not how rich you are, how nice house you live in. That is how active you participate in, how deep you enjoy art. Integrated communities more easily develop an art organization. Cultural diversity is all art forms, an experience of participation that moves you emotionally. Diversity of art bridge segregation between any two nations, art includes whole spectrum of artistic activities. Thus art participation happens all the time, you are not always conscious that you have already engaged art, discussing, appreciating, critiquing. Its pervasive function is really fantastic.
To be honest, when talking about “politics”, it is a little abstracts for me. Participant of art is multifarious. I think there are some common principles or “guidelines” in making, curating, collecting, critiquing and programming art: “diversifying participation”, freedom and comprehensive. In the past, people have to follow some formal way to engage art. But nowadays, participating in arts more easily accessible. Citizen could take advantage of their free time to create what they like. Presenting art works also not limited in gallery or museum. Social community could exhibit art works outside the specific place. Audiences are not only the visitors who going to the museum on purpose, every social members or just strangers could become the art participator. With the invention of the Internet, people could collect art information or resources and post their work through social media at anytime anyplace. Internet outreaching the art, people has access to art that would not otherwise available to them. Sharing art outside their communities, quick scanning art works at home, making comment and discussing art without limitation. That is how such the critique, programing or art making take place.
I always find it difficult talking about politics regardless of the context, and with the current politics of participation in the arts being such a broad topic, I am struggling a bit with articulating my ideas. In regards to the readings, this idea of politics in participation reminds me of the Cultural Bill of Rights and this idea that, as a nation, it is our inherent right to a “collective experience as it is embodied in music, literature, theater, painting, and dance”. There are rights from both the audience standpoint as well as the creative standpoint, and as a nation, community, etc., it is our right (and really, responsibility) to keep our culture thriving.
Power and social practice intersect quite often. When thinking of “power” in social practice I jump to the power of corporate America. This idea is especially prevalent in the “Arts and the Public Purpose” article we read this week. It brings up commercial arts organizations and the fact that, whether marketing to a global audience or a small, niche, one, they are mainly market driven. This ties in transmedia environments because arts organizations are forever trying to expand their audience and that means broadening the way one participates in art. The American Assembly says, “…65 percent of adult Americans watched or listened to the arts primarily…presented by not-for-profit arts organizations through the media; 58 percent created or produced the arts themselves; and 43 percent experienced the arts in person”. Therefore, participation is mostly through transmedia environments. Power influences social practice and social media (or transmedia) extends this.
As we’ve determined in this class so far, diversity is a term that is a difficult to define as “art”. However, in the article by Stern ad Seifert the issue of diversity and participation is really researched in depth. The last small paragraph of the article stood out most to me, reading, “…we contend that it lies in undercutting the structures that enforce a system of involuntary segregation and strengthening those that promote community engagement in communities of choice”. Essentially, by encouraging diversity and allowing cultures to meet and thrive together, arts programs and cultural centers with follow, growing and becoming more prevalent in communities and, very much, diversifying participation.
Many of today’s readings focused on how the arts and community art programs have an ability to connect the diverse groups that make up our collective America. These connections can help break down social barriers while educating the public about different types of people. While I agree with this belief and agenda, I have to wonder what complications arise from such endeavors in our transmedia society. Our second class’s activity and discussion involving #thisisculture works as a wonderful example of issues that can arise, specifically in regards to access of information, As one of our classmates brought up, many of the disenfranchised ethnic and cultural groups in Oregon did not know about the hashtag contest being held by organization that was supposed to help support them. We discussed many reasons why such groups might not participate. Two of the more notable reasons are the lack of technological access and the lack of of knowledge about the organization’s existence or actions. If we are in a community such as Portland or Seattle, the use of arts programs to help diversify is probably more helpful then to scattered groups across more rural areas.
So what are ways that we can begin addressing those issues, and then even if solutions are offered, will funding be found?
I try my hardest to avoid politics, but it seems impossible at times. I must admit to being more than a little ignorant to politics in the arts in general, but I will do my best to convey my thoughts on the subject to hand.
The premise of ‘participation’ as we’ve discussed it in class is quite broad, but I will focus on a more narrow view within my sphere of knowledge.
As I mentioned in class briefly, within the gaming community, there can be great backlashes related to this. There was a company that attempted to crowd-source music via a contest to put into a game they were developing. This was met, not with optimism and enjoyment, but with people calling out the company, accusing them of trying to get free work. The backlash wave was so strong that the company ended up shutting down the contest.
LittleBigPlanet is, I think, a prime example of curation going well. The game was the first in a (albeit short) line utilising the “play, create, share” model. The end user can use 99% of the same tools that the game developers used to create their own mechanics, their own levels and, in the second title, their own mini-games. The levels are published to the LBP servers, and as far as I am aware, every single one is still there. Media Molecule (the studio that created LittleBigPlanet), has curated all of these levels and made them available to everyone who has the software to play them. In point of fact, the player is often referred to as a “creator curator”. On a smaller level, the players curate different assemblages of materials and mechanics to create the levels they make.
I think I will leave my little speech here. I feel as though I have exhausted my knowledge upon this topic, but perhaps I’ll think of more to add to this later.
The article “Arts and the Public Purpose” do reminds me how power can be reflect to art activities. With this topic, participation should always be the lexicon.Audiences and creatives have the same right to share the participate of creating arts. Also when dialogues happens, collaboration and bridging lead to diversity.
Diversity has always been a word we bring up in the class and also among the art environment topics. Any elements can do any environment differ, so which in another way to understand this, is the fact that no environment is the same, since biology diversity may have different effect, there can never be a same pond even in the exactly forest, cultural and power can lead diversity into such a complicate result.
In Chinese, the relationship between art and politics is very interesting， a lot of artists try them beat to express their ideas for their creation, try to compete with Chinese political system, but in China, freedom of artistic creation is not allowed in China,if you creative over anti-government theme,that will be bring trouble with yourself.So I think, between art and politics have a delicate relationship, only art enter the society can play a role, in order to be accepted by the public, the artist is often unintended bear the political responsibility, the arts need passion, this passion comes from politics, many the famous works of art are political as a theme, so art is not something pure form.Artistic influences the politics, the arts promote political progress,arts can be transformed into a political, political is the highest levels and the most complex of art, in a sense,politics is art.
So, I think that art has sociality, but art has its own autonomy, the arts of politica and sociality is through by self-expression, and when the social aesthetics of art as an artistic main part,the reality will be express by political and ideology such social function to render out, so there is no more practical than artistic practice, the existence of art is practice and participation.
The question of curation is tricky, because there are institutional parameters around who is qualified to be a curator and what it really means to “curate.” But there are also informal means by which curation is practiced. Pinterest, for example, is an exercise in curation. People get to create boards of what they like, be it Food, Quotes, Books, Movies, Wedding Plans, and even art, etc. Anything and everything can be curated on Pinterest. Even though the output is virtual, this can alter how people think about and approach the idea and act of curating. Power changes, doesn’t it? In a museum curators have a special skills set and knowledge, they are in a position which allows them to declare “this is art.” They are given power over the definition of art, and are in a position of influence. Not to say that curators are bad.
I had the pleasure of listening to two curators answer a question asking how they, as “real curators,” felt about people using the word “curate” in daily life. She mentioned Pinterest as an example, as well as advertisements with taglines like “curate your home!” and “come curate our collection of blank.” One curator said that she did get a little huffy when she heard her employment title being flung around as if no experience was necessary to be a curator. “I don’t need to ‘curate my kitchen,’ I’m already a curator, thank you very much.” The other curator mentioned that she was intrigued by the term’s sudden spike in usage. “I think it’s a good thing. I’m flattered by the attention the action of curating is receiving.” I think that there is an interesting play of power surrounding this word. Who gets to claim it and decide what art or food or household products are “legitimate”? There is a certain power there. Maybe being able to “curate” your own collection of things, whether on Pinterest or in your home or any other myriad of places, gives you a feeling of power over your own aesthetic choices.
The politics surrounding the arts differs from area to area. I grew up in a small town that only promoted artistic involvement in the local Catholic Church. Art programs were few and far between unless it had something to do with the Church. During my High School years (in another small town), the only reason our Theatre Department was kept after Texas cut art funding, was because the program had the most competition awards. If the program had had few to no awards, it would have been cut completely. The status of the Theatre Director also had a small part in why the program wasn’t cut. He happened to be the richest man in town and had donated close to a million dollars to the school and community in the 10 years he had been living in the town. The man had power, and therefore got his way. During the budget cuts, the middle school lost all arts except for Band, which again was competition based.
Digital marketing course in Delhi, The opportunities & Scope for
Digital Marketing professionals is huge in India right now.
فروشگاه اینترنتی برند سم با هدف معرفی و فروش تمامی سموم حیوانی و کشاورزی سموم حشرات با بهترین کیفیت و کمترین زمان آغاز به کار کرده است. برای آشنایی بیشتر باخدمات و محصولات ما و نحوه استفاده از سموم می توانید از مشاوره رایگان ما بهره مند شوید. متخصصین برند سم با صبر و حوصله و تکیه بر دانش و تجربه خود مشکل شما را شناسایی کرده ومتناسب با نیاز و بودجه شما بهترین محصول را برای شما معرفی می کنند.هدف ما این است که با کمک به بهداشت عمومی در توسعه صنعت کشاورزی و نیز سلامت محیط زیست سهمی داشته باشیم.
https://bosterpomp.royablog.ir/
thanks for good sit its very well
طراحیهای ما به صورت سفارشی و اختصاصی برای هر مشتری بوده و بنابراین منظور از وب سایتهای سفارشی، طراحی آن نیست. دلیل اینکه به این سایتها سفارشی گفته میشود، خدمات ویژهای است که برای طراحی آن خواسته میشود. معمولا افرادی که سفارش طراحی سایت را میدهند، شرکت و سازمانهایی هستند که میخواهند بخشی از سیستم کاغذی یا اکسل شرکت را به صورت نرمافزارهای موجود در وب سایت انجام دهند و یا استارت آپهایی هستند که میخواهند یک ایده جدید و خاص را از طریق بسترهای نرمافزاری سایت اجرا کنند.
در صنایع قطعه سازی بصورت انبوه استفاده از ابزارهای کنترل هزارخاری اجتناب ناپذیر میباشند هرگونه خطای ماشینکاری در پروسه خانکشی از قبیل ساییدگی ابزار و یا لب پریده گی تعدادی از دندانه های برشی ابزار و یا ایجاد پلیسه در داخل پروفیلها و عوامل دیگر که تشخیص آنها با چشم غیر مسلح دشوار میباشد باعث تولید قطعات بصورت معیوب گشته و ایجاد خسارت سنگین به تولید کننده میگردد .
https://adaco-broach.com/%d8%a7%d8%a8%d8%b2%d8%a7%d8%b1-%d9%87%d8%a7%db%8c-%d8%ae%d8%a7%d9%86%da%a9%d8%b4%db%8c/
آنکارا جزء کلان شهرهای کشور ترکیه محسوب می شود که خیلی توریستی نیست و برخلاف شهرهای استانبول، آنتالیا و دیگر شهرهای توریستی این کشور، توریست و گردشگر زیادی در این شهر دیده نمی شود. اکثر افرادی که در این شهر زندگی می کنند، ترک هستند و شهروندان ترکیه می باشند. شهر آنکارا از نظر فرهنگی و شرایط زندگی از سطح بالایی برخوردار است و می توان گفت یکی از بهترین شهرهای ترکیه می باشد. همچنین از نظر امکانات رفاهی و تحصیلی در جایگاه بسیار خوب و مناسبی در سطح جهان قرار گرفته است.
آنکارا به شهر استانبول خیلی نزدیک است و بازارها و مراکز خرید بسیار زیادی دارد که همین یکی از مزیت ها جهت خرید خانه در آنکارا به حساب می آید. از دیگر مزایای ویژه و منحصر به فرد خرید املاک و مستغلات در شهر آنکارا می توان به هزینه های پایین زندگی، آب و هوای بسیار خوب، حمل و نقل قوی و بازدهی خوب سرمایه گذاری اشاره کرد.
https://itibarcity.com/%d8%ae%d8%b1%db%8c%d8%af-%d9%85%d9%84%da%a9-%d8%af%d8%b1-%d8%a2%d9%86%da%a9%d8%a7%d8%b1%d8%a7/
شرکت لوله بازکنی در تهران بزرگ یکی از برترین های این حوزه می باشد که سالیان سال است در این زمینه فعالیت دارد و آماده ارائه خدمات در باز کردن انواع لوله های حمام، توالت فرنگی و ایرانی، حیات، آشپزخانه و…
✓خدمات لوله بازکنی وتخلیه چاه در تهران
✓خدمات لوله بازکنی با دستگاه تراکم هوا
✓خدمات لوله بازکنی با دستگاه موتور پمپ
✓خدمات لوله بازکنی با دستگاه قوی فنر زنی
✓انجام خدمات لوله کشی درتهران
سرم صورت نیاسینامید ۱۰% + زینک ۱% اوردینری The Ordinary
یک سرم ضد جوش، قابض منافذ، روشنکننده پوست و تقویتکننده سلامتی پوست صورت است.
سرم نیاسینامید اوردینری بدون الکل و چربی و پارابن و مواد مضر است و بافت بسیار سبکی دارد. این سرم باعث کاهش جوشهای زیر پوستی شده و با کنترل ترشح چربی و سبوم پوست سبب جلوگیری از ایجاد جوشهای جدید میشود.
https://abanashop.com/product/%d8%b3%d8%b1%d9%85-%d8%b5%d9%88%d8%b1%d8%aa-%d9%86%db%8c%d8%a7%d8%b3%db%8c%d9%86%d8%a7%d9%85%db%8c%d8%af-10-%d8%b2%db%8c%d9%86%da%a9-1-%d8%a7%d9%88%d8%b1%d8%af%db%8c%d9%86%d8%b1%db%8c/
از کودکی به ما گفته شده است که خواب کافی کلید سلامتی است. خواب بد می تواند منجر به بسیاری از مشکلات سلامتی از جمله استرس یا درد مفاصل شود. اگر در طول شب خواب خوبی را تجربه کنید، تاثیر آن را در سلامتی جسمی و روانی خود احساس خواهید کرد. خواب خوب سطح استرس و اضطراب ما را کاهش می دهد، برای ذهن و بدن ما مفید است و کیفیت کلی زندگی ما را بهبود می بخشد. تشک خوشخواب کیفت خواب شمارا تضمین می کند.
https://kangarlouco.com/%d8%aa%d8%b4%da%a9-%d8%ae%d9%88%d8%b4%d8%ae%d9%88%d8%a7%d8%a8/
لوله بازکنی
✓باز کردن انواع لوله های حمام، توالت فرنگی و ایرانی، حیات، آشپزخانه و…
✓خدمات لوله باز کنی وتخلیه چاه در تهران
✓خدمات لوله باز کنی با دستگاه تراکم هوا
✓خدمات لوله باز کنی با دستگاه موتور پمپ
✓خدمات لوله بازکنی با دستگاه قوی فنر زنی
✓انجام خدمات لوله کشی درتهران
https://lbtb.ir/
ابزار های رولینگ شانه ای در صنعت قطعه سازی انبوه برای تولید هزار خار بر روی شافتهای انتقال نیرو استفاده میگردد. با استفاده از ابزارهای فوق در عرض چند ثانیه انواع مختلف پروفیل های هندسی بر روی شافتهای انتقال نیرو ایجاد میشود. عملیات ایجاد شیار بر روی شافتهای انتقال نیرو با استفاده از روش فوق در مدت زمان بسیار کمی در حدود ده ثانیه و یا کمتر اانجام میشود و بعلت اینکه در این روش براده برداری صورت نمیگیرد و تنها جابجایی مواد با استفاده از نیروی فشاری انجام میگیرد لذا پروفیلهای ایجاد شده دارای استحکام لهیدگی قابل توجه و صافی سطح بالایی میباشند.
Our Company is the Best Digital Marketing Company in India / Best Web Development Company in India. Digital Yetch provides the best digital marketing services, web development & best mobile app development services in India. Our company is one of the top 10 digital marketing companies in India.
Visit here- https://www.digitalyetch.com/
Find the best Agra Escort Call Girls profile at Rosymehta. We are the best escort services provider in Agra City. Our dedicated call girls have more than 5 years of experience in escort services. They never leave their clients unhappy.
Join best graphic design courses in summers in 2024.Best Graphic Design Institute in Delhi
Trusted Realestate Developers In Hyderabad – MyronHomes