This weeks assignment was hard for me to write about because I feel very inflicted on the issues to consider in the reading in comparison to the murals, and the time of period that they were written in. I understand that given different organizations and what they stand for in the US, it makes sense that they would want to be represented properly through the expression of public art, but I also think given different time periods, and through different artists, that different representations will be presented.

With these murals the biggest things that I inspect as far as topics of issue that come in mind are civic improvement, issues of diversity, capturing history and relevance.

When it comes to civic improvement I think that these murals represent how, in a sense, there has been civic improvement throughout the world leading up until the time and point in which the murals were painting and to an extent. These murals definitely signify important periods through out the years of growth in the world both in the arts and and in the sciences, but I think that they excuse a lot of important people included in those time periods. In this sense I think about the civil issues of slavery and how it was abolished or how women were given the right to vote in the 20s and how that is not represented. I am sure in one way or another this significant impact in the US and the world could be represented as civic improvement in the world of science and in the arts.

The next issue that this raises concerns with is the issues of diversity. When looking at these murals it is hard to tell any bit of diversity that you see in them when it comes to race. It is clear to see the types of impacts that the Caucasian race has made on the world and within the issue of civic development, but there is not real portrayal about the impact that people of color have made on the impact in the world and especially in American life. It seems to me that the only impact we see is how they have helped along the way to improve life for the Caucasian race, and not in a good way whatsoever.

The next issue that comes to mind is that of capturing history. Does this mural capture history in the kind of light that everyone would be able to appreciate? I can’t say that it does. When I view it I think that there is a lot of important parts of history that the murals don’t capture and a lot of people important to the world that could be included to make these murals in concurrence with the times and live of people in the world today.

In turn this brings me to the point of relevance. In what ways is this painting relevant? I obviously think that this painting is relevant in a lot of sense to the times and significance of what had been happening in that period. It makes sense that it was significant in many ways to what had been happening in the periods that is representing as well. But, as I have made a case of it is not necessarily relevant to the times and happenings that we live in now and today. In fact it doesn’t seem that it was entirely representative and relevant to the time and the people involved within that period either. I think that in many ways these murals represent the feelings of many Americans, and especially in Oregon, the period of the late 30s and early 40s. We were still very much a segregated country both in color and gender, and I think the whether intentionally or not, the Runquist brothers made note of that in each of their works.

For this weeks assignment I went ahead and watched the video about the Amen Break with absolutely no idea what I was getting myself into, but I am so pleased that I watched it! I am an advent supporter and lover of dance music and have been for quite a few years now. Although I support all sub-genres of dance music, I honestly cannot stand jungle or DnB (drum and bass) for the simple fact that it has always sounded the same to me regardless of differing artists. I know a lot of people like to think that about all forms of dance music, and to someone who has not spent a lot of time listening to it and and finding the differences in each sub-genre I could completely understand why. It was so interesting and enlightening for me to learn that a 6 second sound from a song made in 1969 is the basis for just about every (if not all) jungle and DnB songs, as well as a lot of late 80s early 90s hip hop songs. I’m curious if there are any other genres from either the 90s or now that anyone else has noticed the same break sample being used?

After reading Beverly Jones piece the primary thesis that I see is the relationship between “specific image, object, event or environment to conceptual frame” and how these frames “exist within art and technology and are present in other forms of symbolic and material culture”(21).  Meaning that in such things as games or computer graphics there is an influence or connection to art and artistic creation.

An example that Jones speaks of in the early years of computer graphics in correlation to her thesis that stuck out most to me was when she explained some of the early digitally computed images of the 1960s. She talks of how these images were usually done by engineers and technicians who were hired by the government, and that not all images served “technological research or practical purposes; some were done in ‘spare time'”(23). She then goes on to say that in using a kind of technology like computer graphics as an engineer or technicians in their spare time was a reflection of “a desire by individuals not trained in art to produce aesthetic imagery”(23). When one is to think of an imagine in aesthetic perspective it then becomes more focused in the sphere of art, rather than the functionality of technological innovations such as computer graphics.

When I think about her thesis in modern day technology the best example I can think of is 3D printing. 3D printing has been on the rise in the last couple years for the immense amount of scientific and medical advances that this new type of technology is making. I have personally seen the use of one of these printers in a science class I took this last fall here at UO. The class was a green science class focusing on the use of plastics and polymers and the kind of future we could create in using more renewable and biodegradable resources in substation from the many non-recyclable plastics that we as consumers use. 3D printing uses a type of material that could be melted down and used over and over again to create new products for consumer use. Not only can a printer like this be used in the science and medical field, where I believe it had its start, but it is making advances in the art world as well.

I read an article from the Huffington Post called “14 Ways 3D Printing Has Changed The Art World” that goes into detail about many ways that 3D printing has been influencing the art world. In the first paragraph the author Katherine Brooks says “A 3D-printed portrait of President Obama dominated a few headlines last week, as the Smithsonian Institution welcomed the three-dimensional sculpture like no other into its presidential collection. The boom in additive art has been building for several years, capped off now by a major art museum’s acceptance of the art-meets-science medium. In fact, it seems no corner of the art world remains untouched by 3D printing’s growing influence, from architecture to dance to painting to music.” She goes on to speak of even things like 3D stop-animation in which characters are printed and photographed over 4 weeks to create only 2 seconds worth of footage. A combination on multiple platforms of technology, art and science.

Source: Brooks, K. (2014, June 30). 14 Ways 3D Printing Has Changed The Art World. Retrieved November 23, 2014, from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/30/3d-printing-art_n_5534459.html

For this weeks assignment I was really unsure of what we were going to be diving into. After watching the TED talk (which I watched a total of four times) I am still so unsure of what all of this means. Hearing that gamers in the year of 2010 spent 3 billion hours a week playing video games astonished me. And to follow that up with the suggestion that we should increase that SEVEN times in order to help world issues like hunger, poverty, climate change, global conflict and even obesity shocked me. To be quite honest even after watching this TED talk I can’t make much sense of Mcgonigal’s reasoning. I think that through the means of technology many of these issues can be helped, maybe never fully solved, but definitely on that track. I do not see most, if hardly any of the gamers of the world being the next generation to make a difference however. I give Mcgonigal credit in her research and optimistic view of the gamer population, but I’d really like to know where her research and steps in her 10 year plan to make a difference through gaming stands now 4 years later.

Speaking personally it is really hard for me to define spirituality. I think that everyone has a different definition and that we are all spiritual beings in our own way. The best definition I can give is having faith in something or someone whether they be real or not. I feel that many people think that you have to believe in a certain religion or some being bigger than yourself in order to be spiritual, but I personally believe that you don’t have to believe in anything more than what you know to be a conscious being. One example I try to use myself is being mindful. The core teachings in meditation is being mindful of your breath and being aware of your surroundings, and although many people place meditative practice with buddhism, I don’t believe it means you have to practice or believe the buddhist religion. I myself do not claim to be buddhist or do I even practice meditating like I should. I think that the act of just being mindful is a spiritual one in its own, and something that everyone should be more aware of. To be mindful means you are focusing on what you are doing here and now, and if we can focus on what we are doing now, and have faith that what is meant to be will be, then in that sense I am transcending past myself and letting life run its course.

I absolutely think that spirituality differs from religion. I used to be a very dedicated Christian and a follower of Christ for quite some time in my life. I would attend church every Sunday, youth groups on Monday nights, and dedicate my summers to attending and working and Christian affiliated camps. These were some of the greatest experiences of my life, and I made some of the best friends I could ever ask for, but there were so many things happening within the Christian religion that I now see and disagree with. For myself, I was made to believe that certain acts were sinful, and although we are all sinners we should strive to not do these things and always pray and ask for forgiveness if we do them. Religion was always about doing things with the thought of Christ in mind. For a while it felt like if something was going wrong in my life it was because I wasn’t dedicated enough time to Christ or asking him for forgiveness for sinning, and then in turn sinning made me feel like a bad person and made me feel awful for what I was doing. Religion to me felt like I was in chains. Now that I’ve stepped away from the Christian religion I live my life the way I choose to and I don’t feel bad about things like drinking with my friends. Now I feel more spiritual than I ever did, because my life has its ups and its downs, but without the shackles of religion reigning over me, I have experienced so much more in life and have seem myself in a much more transcended level of awareness to the world.

Defining creativity is also tough for me, but I think I would best describe it as a process that we go through to solve problems and construct new things. Creativity is something that we all have inside of us in my opinion even if we may not consider ourselves as being artistic. For example, how many times have any of us been put in a situation where we had to find a solution or get something done and instead of doing it the way we’re told to we do it our way or a new way. That took time to create and be creative in our way of thinking.

Defining the source of creativity is even more of a challenge because I think there are many different paths in which creativity can come to be. I feel that creativity takes inspiration or a reason to feel inspired because it eludes to the definition I gave of being a process. In order to find the source of creativity I think we need to dig into what it is that is inspiring us to most to want to go through the process of being creative and design the pieces of work that we do or solve our issues is ways we wouldn’t normally.

When I first read what this weeks lessons were going to based around I was really intrigued. At first I thought that we would be reading or watching presentations on how art is based around religion (like angelic figures or paintings based around God from the middle ages), but was surprised after doing the reading to see how much Grey focused spirituality in his artwork around the types of spiritual awakenings he had through things like smoking DMT, and being educated in the power of understanding the 7 chakras. I’ve spent quite a bit of time watching documentaries and reading about people, especially artist, who have taken hallucinogens and captured its power to turn it into something fantastic or revolutionary. Francis Crick even admitted to being high on LSD when he first deduced the double-helix structure of DNA.

My favorite part of this chapter from Grey’s book was the section about inspiration and how he described how each artist has their own unique process that they go through in becoming inspired to create their next piece. He says that “Inspiration is the most mysterious step in the creative process. The artist is possessed by a create force, overtaken by a vision and driven to create. Inspiration is beyond reason”(82). I really love the way that he way that he makes sense of inspiration by exalting it to this type of higher being. Like spirituality in a way. I think that being spiritual does not always mean that you have to believe in the same higher power, or to believe that a higher power exists, but being spiritual is believing that there are things even in yourself that can transcend you that is bigger than you’ll ever be able to understand. Like inspiration, it is “beyond reason” as he puts it, as if it is beyond ourselves and something bigger than will ever know. Inspiration is in all of us and comes from many different sources and ways of thinking, but I personally believe we will never fully understand or know those sources.

This weeks topic was one that I found great interest in learning about because to start, I hate most horror movies. Some of them (specifically any having to do with spirituality and witchcraft) actually terrify me to the point that I can hardly sleep at night after watching one. Even the smallest creak in the floor or rush of wind outside and I am wide awake, sweating and covering every bit of me with my blanket like its some sort of magical shield that will protect me from the “thing” thats out to get me. But, what’s funny is that I am the biggest fan of American Horror Story (all seasons) and Boardwalk Empire. Boardwalk Empire is not scary in any sense, but it does give you that tense feeling at times before watching someone get brutally murdered by a gun to the face or slashing of the neck. So why is it that I feel this sense of excitement and interest in such shows like Boardwalk Empire and American Horror Story where they take creepiness and murder to an all new level, but hate every other kind of horror?

In the first article I read called “Horror Movies: Why People Love Them,” by Leslie Fink she discusses three reasons for having the desire to watch these horrific films and TV shows. I want to focus mostly on the first  reason that she explained which was desired effect. She spoke with social scientist for the Oxford University press, Jeffery Goldstein, whom suggested that “we watch [horror] for different reasons, which include enjoying the adrenaline rush, being distracted from mundane life, vicariously thumbing our noses at social norms, and enjoying a voyeuristic glimpse of the horrific from a safe distance.” Then going back to the article by Noël Carroll I remembered how he mentioned that “the horror story is driven explicitly by curiosity. It engages its audience by being involved in process of disclosure, discovery, proof, explanation, hypothesis and confirmation”(279). To me it seems that both Carroll and Goldstein are suggesting the same thing about horror here: that curiosity may have killed the cat, but it has yet to kill any of us who find enjoyment in watching horror. Adrenaline rush, distraction from life, a glimpse of horror from a safe distance, all a means or reaction to being curious.

The second article that I read was called “The Psychology of Scary Movies” from the website filmmakeriq.com. In this article the authors talked about 8 different theories based around our attraction to horror. They included Carroll’s theory about how we are attracted to horror because of curiosity and fascination, but also included theories like: psychoanalytic, philosophical (through a process called catharsis), Excitation Transfer, Dispositional Alignment, Sensation Seeking Scale, Gender Socialization theory, and finally societal fears. I think the theory that I found most interesting in all of these, in comparison to the theory of curiosity and fascination that Carroll put forth is the idea of societal fears. David J. Skal came up with this idea and bases it around the history of horror films and how in the time period they were created there was a type of societal fear, most likely political as well, that cause this kind of horror film to be extracted into the community. The kind of examples he gives of this are how in the 50s there was a rise in mutant monster films, most likely based around the type of nuclear testing and warfare that was being threatened in the late 40s and majority of the 50s. In the 60s there was an increase in zombie horror films, which could be associated with the Vietnam war and the types of gorilla warfare people were seeing then. And in the 70s when movies like Nightmare on Elm Street were created it could be in association with the mistrust in authority after incidents like the Watergate scandals. It is not a theory that I believe is fully complete, but in some cases makes much sense. Like in recent years with movies like 2012 and I Am Legend. I think that in a lot of places in the world we have this fear of apocalypse or the world ending, and although this is not a fear of murder, or ghosts, or demons etc. it is still an idea that causes us to be fearful. In turn these movies were created and even high remarks by critics. It seems to me that these two theories could work together as one. As humans we are curious to the types of horrors that we feel we will never experience, but also ones that seem entirely possible due to current societal fears.

Sources:

Fink, L. (2009, November 6). Horror Movies: Why People Love Them. Retrieved November 9, 2014, from http://www.livescience.com/7949-horror-movies-people-love.html

The Psychology of Scary Movies. (n.d.). Retrieved November 9, 2014, from http://filmmakeriq.com/lessons/the-psychology-of-scary-movies/

The scene that I picked for the mis-en-scene example is when Buffy and her friend are in their dorm room talking about Buffy’s relationship with Riley. The set design seems really on point with what a dorm room would look like and the way that her and her friend are dressed they fit the part of college aged students in that time. The only sounds that are coming from the scene are those from them talking with one another and the sound of the refrigerator door closing, meaning that the sound was diegetic. The lighting seems to be slightly darker which I think adds to the darkness in the scene since Buffy is unable to admit her true self to Riley.

The scene that I picked as the example for both diegetic and non-digetic sound is the scene that shortly follows after Buffy and her friend discussing Riley when you see the man and woman who were planning to meet come together. You hear her knock at the door followed by them talking to one another and then the sounds of them kissing(diegetic). To follow that we are introduced to what looks to be the outside of a clock tower being brought into scene with dark, ominous music(non-diegetic). We hear the clicking of the clock (diegetic) then hear the sounds of a creak as this grayish-green dead looking hand opens a box. The ominous music follows as from scene to scene we are introduced to houses and people asleep and whispers of voices carry as a fog like cloud comes from about each persons mouth and travels to its resting place inside this deathly creatures box.

I think in the second example especially all of the sounds, the costumes and makeup and the special effects added to the horror of what was to come next in this episode. We do not know from just this scene who this scary creature is, but we do know that he is not good and whatever his box is collecting is something that it shouldn’t. In the first scene I think that the costumes, make up and set design were really adding to the story that the show Buffy surrounds, but did not necessarily add to any “horror” within the show.

When I think about how I dress each day the most important thing I consider first is what I’ll be doing that day. If I know I’m going to class, but that I have to go to work after I’ll usually dress for comfort where as if I know that I have only class that day I’ll usually take a little bit more time in choosing an outfit that is suitable for the weather, but also comfortable and more fashionable in my opinion. As far as any body adornments, I do have tattoos but they are hidden by my clothing choices in the fall and winter time, and I do wear many rings and sport the 4 wristbands I have left on my right wrist from music festivals I have gone to in the last year. I have my ears pierced, but I never wear earrings. As of late I have been really digging the 90s fashion revival that is happening so when thinking about why I make the choices I do, I think I revolve it around that. I love wearing mens flannels and knee high socks with my combat boots, and rocking a choker necklace.

When I did my first post on the people that I watched I said that I paid a lot of attention to what they were wearing and how in turn their sense of fashion showed the amount of time that they valued. I would say that my personal beliefs and values are encompassed within that. I value time and my health so on days when I have a lot to do, I am more focused on using my time wisely and being comfortable in what I wear. When I have less to do I am more inclined to spend more time on what I wear and how my makeup looks, because looking more put together I think portrays a sense of hygienic standards for myself. I like to look clean cut, because it makes me feel good and makes others look at me and feel the same.

Growing up I would say that my family really valued freedom. I was always given the opportunity to do the things that I wanted to do and my parents were very trusting of me. I made a lot of mistakes and did things that they could not always help me get out of, but I figured a lot of things out and learned a lot in that time. In turn I think that I communicated my sense of freedom in the clothes that I wore because I always wore what I wanted, and it was never anything that was inappropriate, but my parents were also never telling me that I couldn’t wear a certain brand or anything in that sense. I never had a desire to get any crazy piercings I always stuck with different piercings on my ears and when I was 16 I did get my belly button pierced and my parents were always fine with it. On my 18th birthday I got my first tattoo, and although my parents were not excited about the idea of me having a tattoo, they were happy with the result and happy that I made the choice to keep them in places that could be hidden. I went on to get three more tattoos and they have never been disappointed in me for it or ashamed that I got them because I was very smart in making sure that I looked professionally presentable for the future of me getting a job.

With my set of friends I would say they are all a little different and unique, but also similar to me in the way we dress and adorn ourselves. A lot of my friends have tattoos both visible and not, and many of them have facial piercings and ear piercings etc. One of my friends recently dyed his hair a grayish-pastel blue color and one of my other friends has part of her head shaved. Many of us are into the 90s revival and a lot of us share clothes so I would say that the values of my friends is also freedom and they value fashion. I think that they also value being unique in a lot of ways. We all get along well because we enjoy a lot of the same things, but there are many choices that they make in the way they dress and style themselves that I could never see myself doing because of how I value my professional future.

Person 1: From what I see I believe they are a man. He is dressed in jeans and a white t-shirt accompanied with a nice brownish-tan blazer. He has on dress shoes and he wears small, square framed glasses. His hair is short and looks neat and natural like it hasn’t been touched from any dyes but maybe lightened from the sun.

I think that in the way he dresses he values his character and he values his cleanliness. He wants to appear professional, but still somewhat casual. I’m sure he has the option to wear contacts, but the glasses not only make him look more stylish they are a lot less of a hassle to deal with in the morning. It seems to me from his adornments he in that way values time and also values fashion.

Based on their dress and the color of his skin I would guess that he is Caucasian, and between the ages of 21 and 23. Like I said in the beginning I believe he is a man or at least recognizes himself with the male gender. When I was watching him he was smoking a cigarette on the edge of campus so in terms of health he was consciously not making the best decision, but his emotion seemed neutral. He did not seem sad or angry, but also did not seem over joyed or even happy in that moment more in the motion with his normal daily activities.

 

Person 2: From what I see I believe they are a woman. She is dressed in black slacks, a beige sweater, a cream colored scarf, black dress shoes and a black rain jacket. She holds a briefcase that looks like its meant for a laptop in one hand and a coffee cup in the other. Her hair is a light brown and it is down and straight and from what I see she is not wearing any kind of make up.

I think that in the way she dresses she like the first person wants to look professional but casual. Her sweater looks cozy rather than constricting and her dress shoes look very comfortable. I believe that she doesn’t hold makeup to the same value that a lot of other women do as she isn’t wearing any. It seems to me she values being comfortable the way she is rather than worrying about fashion or standards. She is drinking coffee or tea, I could not decipher so my guess would be she also values time, as she does not want to waist the day with being tired or taking a nap.

The assumption I am making about her is that she appears to be Caucasian, in her late 30s early 40s, she seems to be someone who works on campus whether that be professor or not, and she seemed to have a look about her that was complacent. She was on her way to get somewhere and had work to be done that she wanted to get done.

 

Person 3: From what I see this person appears to be a female. She is wearing black leggings, a beige sweater, a grey sweater scarf, beige boot socks and knee high boots. She is carrying a rain jacket and has on a backpack. Her her is brown and it is long and laying down and straight. From what I see her makeup is minimal, no heavy eyeshadows just some mascara and foundation and blush.

The values that I think are demonstrated in this person is that she likes to be cute, but casual. She values her time in the morning and would rather spend more of it sleeping or doing activities she enjoys, rather than spending it getting ready. I think she values her heath because she does not look to be tired or like she is dreading the say, she looks well rested and well put together, but is still comfortable in what she is wearing.

I believe from what I can see she is Caucasian, but she may have something else in her that I couldn’t figure out unless I asked her because her skin tone does seem a little bit more on the brown side. I would say that she is between the ages of 18-20 and like I said she looks to be healthy. Not worn out or anything of that kind. Emotionally speaking she appeared to be pretty happy. She was walking with whom I assume to be friends and they were all talking and giggling with one another.

What I think these assumptions say about my own values and beliefs is that I value and pay attention to health. I’m also conscious of health in the sense of hygiene since it appears that this man looked clean cut.  I also value being clean cut in association with fashion so in some regards I am fashionably conscious. I think I also pay more attention to people of the same race as me. It isn’t that I mean to do this intentionally, or because I have any kind of negative feelings towards people of another race, I think it is just inherent in people to see those of us that are similar to us. I think I just take notice to people who I find myself having some kind of connection with whether I know them or not. Meaning age, race, gender fashion sense etc.