I decided to respond to the Ted Talk that discusses making the world a better place through video games. Before watching this speech, I always considered video games a waste of time. It never occurred to me that the amount of time people spend playing video games would give them some sort of skillset. However after I was finished, it made sense to me that we have a large number of people who have mastered the skills suggested by Jane McGonigal: urgent optimism, social fabric, epic meaning, and blissful productivity. Furthermore, when I finished watching this speech, I personally felt that gamers could better change the world by utilizing their skills in a unique work places. Although Ms. McGonigal’s idea of creating video games that people would play then ideally carry with them in real life was a valid idea, I personally felt that if we designed a work environment with the same principles that draw gamers to excel, and focused that energy to fix real world problems, we would truly exceed in solving real world problems.

I personally define spirituality as a belief that an individual feels emotionally attached too and makes an effort to adjust their actions to go along with this belief. So for example, if someone feels very strongly about being in shape and they feel that by working out they are an all-around better person than if they were to not do this activity, I would define that as spirituality. The reason being is that this individual feels so strongly about being in shape that they contribute many of their outcomes to this belief.

Although I see spirituality and religion as very similar, I believe they differ from one another. I see religion as a more defined form of spirituality. As stated above, spirituality is very open and can be anything that a person has a strong personal, emotional belief towards. As for religion, I think that this strong emotional belief is focused on a God. Therefore, I believe someone could classify their religion as part of spirituality but they cannot classify their spirituality as part of religion unless it involves a God.

I personally define creativity as the process of coming up with an idea. The reason I defined creativity this way is because whenever we come up with an idea, we need to use some form of “creativity” to get there. For example, if I am trying to find a way to complete a task, I am “creating” an idea in my head to get from where I am to where I want to go. I personally see this “creating” process as a form of “creativity” because your mind is using its tools to think abstractly and come up with a solution.

I believe the source of creativity can come from anywhere. If I follow my definition from above, then creativity can come from anything that you get an idea from. An example of this can be if I am walking down the street and I see a cool looking building but I think it would look better red. In that situation, I am “creating” an idea that I gained from looking at a building by thinking abstractly that the building would look better red.

The part of the reading that I found to be the most interesting was the creative process steps. As I was reading through these steps, I was having some trouble relating to them. Although some steps made sense to me, I realized that this was my first time seeing the creative process put into a step by step basis. Before reading these steps, I had never thought about the method that took place for me to reach my creative solution. Then as I started to think more, I realized that putting the creative process into a list of steps seems counterintuitive. When I think of creativity, I think of a free flowing process that everyone does differently. There is no right or wrong way to be creative and therefore you cannot categorize creativity into steps. Although these steps do have some valid points, overall I do not think you can categorize creativity into steps.

Another part of the article that I enjoyed reading was the inspiration section. During this section, the author writes, “Inspiration is the most mysterious step in the creative process. The artist is possessed by a creative force, overtaken by a vision and driven to create” (Grey 81-2). I find this quote very interesting because although I have a set of goals that I get inspired by, I often times get random bursts of inspiration that I am unable to explain. In addition, when the author discusses how he and his wife differ in styles of inspiration, I found myself relating to the author much more. The author describes how he gets inspired when he says, “For me, pressure is my greatest catalyst. Important ideas can come at the last minute under a deadline. Often as a painting is coming to completion, I will have to change an entire section because an essential insight suddenly arises” (80). I personally found these sentences to relate to me perfectly. When I am on a time crunch trying to complete something, I usually have a moment of clarity where I find great insight for a better way to complete my topic at hand.

 

References

Grey, A. (2001). Art as Spiritual Practice. The Mission of Art (1st ed., pp. 205-233). Boston & London: Shambhala.

The first article I chose is written by Richard Sine and discusses why someone would chose to watch a scary movie. At the beginning of the article, the author describes how there is something peculiar about people wanting to watch scary movies when he says: “No doubt, there’s something really powerful that brings people to watch these things, because it’s not logical…most people like to experience pleasant emotions” (Sine 1). The author then begins to reveal that our brain cannot determine the difference between something scary happening on a screen and something scary happening in real life. In particular, this draws men to scary movies because they want to feel like they have mastered the scariest situation. It is almost like an alpha male complex. Another rational on why people might enjoy watching scary movies is because adults generally do not approve of such movies. This can make the viewer feel rebellious since many people want to do what they are not supposed to. Lastly, there has been a major increase with violence in the media. When people see all this, it does a lot of things to their minds and one of them is making them curious. People become curious with how these events occur and where they take place. As a result, the viewers are able to fulfill this itch by watching horror films.

The last part of Sine’s article matches with what Carroll said in her article on why people watch these types of horror films when she writes, “Thus, to a large extent, the horror story is driven explicitly by curiosity” (Carroll 279). I find it weird and slightly discomforting that the human mind naturally wants to know more about such horrible things.

 

My second article is written by Lauren Suval and also discusses why we are drawn to horror films. Suval starts off her article by telling the viewer that she has a love hate relationship with scary movies. Whenever she is watching a scary movie, she can’t take her eyes off of the screen but at the same time she is really scared. She also knows that after the movie is over she is going to have nightmares. Suval mentions that family members often ask her why she watches them if she knows it will have such a negative cognitive impact afterwards. The author then goes on to tell the reader that she has done some research and she has discovered some of the mains reason are that: “it’s a distraction from the daily routines of life; we want to counter social norms; we seek an adrenaline rush; and we hope to voyeuristically glimpse fright from a distance” (Suval 1). Suval also mentions that some adults may watch horror films because they want to relive the fears they had as a kid and let their imaginations become more active again. These horror films give people the opportunity to do these things while maintaining a safe distance from danger.

In our assigned reading, Carroll mentions that: “Horror stories, in a significant number of cases, are dramas of proving the existence of the monster and disclosing the origin, identity, purposes and powers of the monster” (Carroll 279). Although I think Carroll did not intend it in this context, I think this supports the theory mentioned in Suval’s article that people watch scary movies in order to relive childhood fears. Since many children were once afraid of monsters, by watching a scary movie, people are able to believe again that monsters do exist.

 

References

Carroll, N. (2002). Why Horror?. In Neill, A. & Riley, A. (eds.) Arguing About Art: Contemporary Philosophical Debates (2nd ed., Chap. 17). New York, NY: Routledge.

Feature, R. (n.d.). Why We Love Scary Movies. Retrieved February 16, 2015, from http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/features/why-we-love-scary-movies?page=1

Suval, L. (n.d.). Why Are We Drawn to Horror Films? Retrieved February 16, 2015, from http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2014/01/04/why-are-we-drawn-to-horror-films/

When watching a show for entertainment, I rarely notice the effects that go into creating the emotion that I feel; I just feel the emotion. However, I find it very interesting that when you are looking for ways to evaluate a show, things that you never would have notice stand out. This episode of Buffy the Vampire Slayer really supported my opinion on this because right away I noticed mise-en-scene, diegetic sounds, as well as non-diegetic sound. I also noticed than many of these elements occurred simultaneously or right after one another.

One example of mise-en-scene and diegetic sound that stood out to me occurred in the same scene at 2:23. During this scene, a girl is singing a song about death in a creepy looking hallway. The song would represent diegetic sounds because the voice is coming from the character. As for the lighting, it represents mise-en-scene because it is one of the characteristics that you observe during the scene. The reason the hallway gives off a creepy persona is due to the lighting. The beginning of the hallways is the darkest point with occasional lights leading down the corridor where the girl stands at the end. Where the girl stands, the lighting has an effect where half of her body is in the dark and half has a little light. In addition, there is a reflection going down the hallways which gives off the affect that it is night time with a bright moon. When the director shows this, you can make out the words that the girl is sing: “you are going to die screaming but you won’t be heard.” This contributes to the aesthetic of horror because this type of lighting has a persona of being scary, especially when there is a girl standing confidently in the middle of a dark hallway. When the design of this scene is combined with the diegetic sounds of a horrific song, it makes the audience feel tension and wonder what is going to happen next.

A good example of non-diegetic sounds occurs at 13:22. When the scene starts, you can hear spooky music that sounds like deep wind instruments being played slowly. I am not exactly sure why the music feels spooky but the same type of music occurs whenever something bad is about to happen. This type of music represents non-diegetic sound because the music is played to create tension for the audience. In addition, the music adds to the horror in the film because it builds up the viewer’s emotions to the event that is about to occur. This is crucial for a horror film.

As I think about what influenced the way I dress and my body adornment, I have come to the conclusion that there are two factors that have had the biggest impact on me. The first one is my family. Within my family, my parents have the biggest impact on the way I dress and I have adopted some style from each of them. Overall, my family has fairly relaxed dress habits. My dad grew up in San Diego, California so he has a casual, laid back way of dressing while my mom was taught to dress a little nicer. When I was growing up, I was dependent on my parents so I could only buy clothes that they approved of. Although they were not super strict, I used to want shirts that had designs with skulls on them but my mother would never allow it. In addition, my brothers always influenced the way I dressed because I looked up to them and I wanted to dress just like them. However my parents were not as relaxed about body adornment. Growing up, my father always had two rules: no tattoos and no piercings. While I was in high school, my dad told me if I ever got a tattoo or a piercing he would cut me off financially and would not pay for my college. This sounded a bit extreme but I did not want to test him. There were times in high school when I wanted to get a tattoo or my ears pierced but I had to refrain from doing so. Right now I am a senior in college and I still have not had a piercing or a tattoo. Although this is something that I would never admit to him, I am now thankful for his no body adornment rule. I also find it interesting how my dad’s pressure for no body adornment has slowly transformed my opinion to now agree with his view.

The second factor that has influenced me is society and the area I grew up. I feel like my generation has the greatest appreciation for body adornment thus far. You can see this while walking around campus or back home in California because you can constantly see people with tattoos and piercings. In addition, I feel like they are much more casual than they used to be. If you ever ask someone about their tattoos they are generally very open about them and they will tell you the story while showing you the art on their body. When I see this, it makes me want to get one because people express themselves so freely. The author reveals how ancient societies used to think of tattoos much differently than we do now when she writes, “Tattooing in ancient Egypt was confined to women, especially concubines, dancers, and priestesses” (Sanders 9). This is interesting because this is the opposite of how modern society is. The external societal forces and the area I grew up in also impacted the way I dressed myself. Although I would not consider myself the ‘trendiest’ person, I do like to look nice. The time in my life where society and the people around me influenced the way I dressed the most was when I was in middle school. I can clearly remember this because this was when designer jeans started to become very popular. There was a pressure that if you wanted to be cool you had to wear designer jeans. Nowadays, I do not let that kind of external pressure decide what I am going to wear. When I am shopping, I will take other people’s opinions into consideration but it will not be the deciding factor.

The biggest value that is expressed by the way I dress is the belief that there is a time and place for everything. What I mean by this is that there are certain occasion where it is acceptable to wear casual, comfortable clothing and there are certain places where you should put on your suit and tie. I love wearing sweats around because they are easy and comfortable but I am not going to wear them in a place where it is not suitable. I think the reason that I have made this choice can be tied back to my parents. As I mentioned earlier, my dad dresses casual while my mom tends to dress up and as a result I see myself falling somewhere in the middle. I can also definitely witness myself changing overtime. My first couple years of college I would often wear sweat pants to class because dressing up for class was not very important to me. However once I got into the business school, I noticed myself starting to change. Everyone around me was wearing nicer clothes so I started to do the same. This year I have not worn sweat pant once.

References

Sanders, C. R. (1989). Introduction: Body Alteration, Artistic Production, and the Social World of Tattooing. In Customizing the Body (Chap. 1). Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

When I went people watching I decided to sit on 13th street out in front of the book store. Here are the three people that I have chosen to write about:

1. While people watching, someone who stood out to me was an Asian male student as he was walking parallel to campus on the opposite side of the street. The reason he stood out to me was due to the way he was fashionably dressed. This student was wearing clean, bright red shoes with a darker jean. In addition, he was wearing a white shirt with a cool design, a very fashionable, charcoal jacket, and designer glasses. Based off of these materialistic factors, I assumed that he was an exchange student. The reason this came to mind is because many of the Asian exchange students that I have encountered dress very nice. Based off of these observations, I assume that the Asian culture puts a high value on materialistic items such as nice clothes and cars. Although it is hard for me to admit it, these assumptions can reveal that I am slightly materialistic as well. If I did not care about designer goods, then I would not have been able to identify them one this student.

2. Another student that I saw was a white male who looked like he was in his early 20. He was wearing sweat pants, a jacket, and a beanie. I assumed he was on his way to class because had his backpack on. It was difficult for me to guess exactly why this student was wearing what he was wearing. I feel as if he was dressed casually because it was early in the morning and he had just gotten out of bed. However I made another speculation that this individual does not put an emphasis on the way he is dressed. I think part of the reason I picked these two scenarios for the way he was dressed is because I fight that battle within myself on occasion. If it is an early morning class sometimes I just throw on sweats but other times I wear them because they are comfortable and I don’t really care what others think about them.

3. The third person that I am going to describe was a male who looked as though he was from India. The student was wearing timberland boots, a light fade jean, a pastel blue button down shirt, and aviator style glasses with a blue lens tint. When I noticed him, he was leaning up against McKenzie Hall with his backpack by his side and smoking a cigarette. It was interesting because he was not talking to anyone and was just watching people walk by. After watching him for a little while, I feel as though he was trying to look cool. The reason I thought of this, was due to the way he was leaning against the wall and attempting to make eye contact with everyone who passed him. Although he was skinny, I also assume he might not be in the best shape since he was smoking a cigarette. The assumption of him trying to act cool and not being in shape I think was a subconscious rational for my dislike of cigarettes. These subconscious thoughts were not something that I realized at the time.

Summary:
The article starts off by the author, an artist, telling the reader that she spends one to two hours a night cooking and wonders whether she is wasting her time. She then realizes that she uses quite a bit of creativity while cooking and realizes that food is a form of art. She then uses the rest of the article to explain to the reader why food is a form of art.

Analysis:
These two articles take two different perspectives on determining whether food is a form of art. Throughout the article that I examined, they were constantly giving real life examples about why food is art. I found this interesting because the article talked about chefs who did things like “[create] elaborate installations using cupcakes” and created an “unlimited ocean” which “was a grid of 30,000 piles of rice” (Strycker 1). The article also gave examples of museums that had interactive exhibits where “members of the community [would] bring fruit and collaborate with one another to make jams” (Strycker 1).

Although there were some areas of overlap, I felt like our assigned reading tried to use hard evidence to prove that food is a form of art rather than showing us like my article. Tefler take a bunch of different points of view and theories and proves to the reader why food is a form of art. An example of this is when she writes, “I have so far discussed cookery as an art, but perhaps cookery is a craft. So we need to know what the difference is between art and craft” (Tefler 15). The author then goes on to break down each point and prove why food is an art and not a craft. Although this quote does not directly show why food is an art, it reveals the theme of the paper and how the author uses each page to slowly prove her point of food being an art.

The areas that stood out the most to me where these two articles over lapped is that food has the ability to draw more emotions and engage more senses than other pieces of artwork. The article that I selected does a good job describing this when the author says, “And perhaps more than any other discipline, food has the ability to appeal to all of our senses—a combination of colors, textures, crunches, smells and tastes goes into the making of a meal” (Strycker 1). It is amazing to think that experiencing food is able to bring together so many of your senses. I personally believe that this is what makes food so great. Teflers also discusses how she enjoys the combination of the different senses while eating food when she says, “I like the way cottage cheese contrasts in flavor and texture with rye bread” (Tefler 10). Tefler also argues in her article how food allows for someone to not only experience the five senses but also pleasure. The reason both of these articles bring up this point is because food is unlike any other form of art. A person is allowed to activate more senses with food than they can from a painting. Furthermore, there is a lot more to food than the taste and the way it looks. In my chosen article, the author writes, “These chefs aren’t just cooking inventive and delicious cuisine. They are also using food to tell stories, conjure memories, and to establish philosophies, such as a connection between cooking, community and sustainability” (Strycker 1). Although the food itself may be transient, this quote demonstrates how there are many more aspects to food that will last much longer. Tefler backs up the idea that food has much more meaning to it than people realize when she says, “it can symbolize a nation’s way of life and traditions” (Tefler 25).
To conclude, I just wanted to say that this week has been a very interesting week while trying to decipher if food is a form of art. For each item that I have written this week, I have gained a new perspective on food being art. I especially enjoyed the contrast between the two articles above because I felt like they go hand in hand. After reading both of those article, I can now say with certain that I consider food to be a form of art.

References:

Tefler, E. (2002). Food as Art. In Neill, A. & Riley, A. (eds.) Arguing About Art: Contemporary Philosophical Debates (2nd ed., Chap. 2). New York, NY: Routledge.

Strycker, J. (2013, January 7). From Palate to Palette: Can Food be Art? Retrieved February 2, 2015, from http://createquity.com/2013/01/from-palate-to-palette-can-food-be-art/