Month: January 2014

I believe food can be viewed as an art in certain circumstances. In Tefler’s paper Arguing About Art it is mentioned that “a work of art is by definition a man-made thing” (18), which would make certain kinds of food considered a work of art depending on the preparation process. The preparation process brought up by the “Fast food” video would not make me consider the food mentioned as a work of art. I would argue that “slow food” is considered a work of art due to the natural preparation process that leads to the creation of the slow made and in many cases organic food that is considered part of the slow food movement. Tefler’s argument that classifying something as a work of art takes into account “the maker’s or exhibitor’s intentions as criterion for deciding whether something is a work of art or not” (12), would support my earlier claim that the preparation process has an impact on the classification of the food being created. An example of a food preparation impacting classification would be the food prepared in a fancy restaurant compared to food prepared at a fast food restaurant, just by looking at how the food is prepared it is obvious that one maker is trying harder to appeal to their customers than the other. In the reading for this week the difference between craft and art was discussed, “ art is original creation, wheras craft is carrying out an instruction” (Tefler 15), which would make the way the food is made at a fast food restaurant craft, while the food at fine restaurants being considered art. When considering the different theories and definitions of art, the theory mentioned by Ellen Dissanayake in What is Art For that best represents my views about food and art would be Modernism, which focused on “elucidating principles such as taste and beauty that govern all the arts and indeed make them not simply paintings or statues but examples of (fine) art” (17). This definition of art by Tefler would definitely include fine/ gourmet food as works of art. I also agree with Tefler’s statement “both an original recipe and an actual dish are works of art if they are regarded aesthetically” (17), this would mean that the creator of the recipe and dish imagined the food with the purpose of appealing visually to the restaurant patron.

Paleoanthropsychobiological is a term coined by Ellen Dissanayake meaning that art includes human history as well as human societies and that art itself is a natural psychological need and is such a natural trait of the human species.

 

When Dissanayake mentioned the phrase “make special” she was referring to the natural ability humans have to view things of high importance, or with an outcome that is significant as special. More specifically the intuitive knowledge that “something that is “special” is different from the mundane, the everyday, the ordinary” (Dissanayake 22), which she claims is an ability that animals have that aids in survival. The beginning of a behavior of art Dissanayake offers is the ability to recognize that something is special as well as be able to be able to make something special.

 

In Art for Life’s Sake by Ellen Dissanayake she identifies a variety of different theories, movements and periods of art in Western European history. In the medieval times art was “in the service of religion, as they have always been, but were not regarded “aesthetically,” if this means separately from their revelation of the Divine” (Dissanayake 16), meaning the look of the piece of art was a lower priority than the religious significance of the artwork. During the Renaissance period the art became less religiously focused and transitioned to “man-centered concerns, but their works continued to portray a recognizable world” (Dissanayake 16), which meant that the art accurately represented the subject matter whether it is ideal or not. During the eighteenth century the “modernity” trend arose bringing with this trend “was a subject that came to be called “aesthetics”- a concern with elucidating principles such as taste and beauty that govern all the arts and indeed make them not simply paintings or statues but examples of (fine) art” (Dissanayake 17). This was a time when art reached a level of such appreciation that it was believed that a certain attitude was required so that the art could be appreciated separate from a person’s personal, social and religious beliefs.

The reading for this week addressed how different times in history as well as locations around the world have approached the topic of art and the different ways it is practiced and taught. The author’s claim that “there was a special frame of mind for appreciating works of art-a “disinterested” attitude that is separate from one’s own personal interest in the object” (Dissanayake 17), makes a good point because this attitude allows a variety of viewers to appreciate art without knowing the artist’s purpose for creating the work of art. This claim made me wonder why people who study pieces of art spend so much time analyzing the events that occurred in history when certain pieces were created if it is not detrimental to the enjoyment of the art whether the viewer knows the actual purpose and reason behind the artist’s work.  I believe that Dissanayake had the same thought when she wrote that another idea popular in the art world was “art for art’s sake, suggesting that art had no purpose but to “be” and to provide opportunities for enjoying an aesthetic experience that was it’s own reward” (18), I believe that there are many examples of works of art that were created just for their aesthetic appeal and don’t intend to tell a story or elicit a specific emotion. Another point made by the reader that also addresses the role of viewer’s in how art is perceived was that “the critic became not only helpful but integral to the reception of works of art” (Dissanayake 18), implying that since comprehending “high art” required a certain level of education, uneducated individuals could not fully understand or enjoy art without being told what the intention of the artist was. Dissanayake goes further by including George Dickie and Arthur Danto’s idea that “an artworld composed of critics, dealers, gallery owners, museum directors, curators, art magazine editors, and so forth, was the source of conferring the status “work of art” onto objects” (19), which would also imply that the artists themselves were powerless to how their art would be perceived and that it’s status or acceptance in the world of art depended on the artworld’s acceptance of their art.

The reading of this week had me wondering how we choose our values and what influences this decision. The reading stated, “there is a good deal of evidence that human beings are not primarily driven by genetically determined instincts” (Lewis 7), which would imply that in this instance nurture has more influence over a person than nature when considering the nature vs. nurture debate. This would mean that a person’s values are not inherently their own, outside sources such as teachers, parents and (if religious) priests would shape our value systems. Lewis acknowledges “human beings cannot separate the way they arrive at values from the values themselves” (Lewis 13), which would also imply that the influences or people who helped form a person’s value system is in a way imbedded into that value. This could mean that a person decides their actions or behaviors that coincide with a certain value due to how they feel a certain person would react or a person was taught to act a certain way and later in life continue those actions without noticing that person’s influence.

I myself have noticed that many of the values that I place high importance on are from the way I was raised. An example would be that I was raised to believe that education is and should be a person’s top priority in life, and as such have always placed a high importance on my schoolwork and furthering my education. When it came time for everyone to decide on what they wanted to do after high school I was struck with the realization that not everyone planned to attend college, this thought was so foreign to me because without realizing it I had placed education and wisdom close to the top of my list of values. Although my parents were proud of the choice they did not explicitly tell me that I needed to or had to attend college, they had instilled in me that aspect of their own value system without me realizing it’s origin.

Lewis, Hunter. A Question of Values: Six Ways We Make the Personal Choices That Shape Our Lives. San Francisco: Axios, 1990.

1.

1. Health
2. Family
3. Friendship
4. Enjoyment
5. Wisdom
6. Loyalty
7. Location
8. Leadership
9. Personal accomplishment
10. Personal development
11. Wealth
12. Security
13. Expertness
14. Power
15. Community
16. Prestige
17. Integrity
18. Creativity
19. Independence
20. Service

 

2. My life and the way I choose to live my life is strongly influenced by the values that I have deemed worthy; such as, health, family, friendship, enjoyment and wisdom. I acknowledge that there is a chance that some or all of these values have been introduced to me either from my parents or society as being important, but ultimately I have made the decision to adhere to these values as my life progressed. An example of me continuing values throughout my life would be the fact that I have continued my education in an attempt to further my knowledge, this is my way of furthering myself rather than through religion due to me not being religious as discussed in the definition of wisdom through the prioritizing life values website. I have made the decision to continue my education even beyond the years when my parents controlled whether I attend school or not.

My family being such a large part of my life as shown by their placement on my values list does mean that I enjoy spending large amounts of time with my family, in fact I currently live with my twin sister and in the same town as my brother and visit my parents often. My parents taught me the importance of my own personal health, my mother specifically got my sister and I involved in running daily and keeping track of our food intake. Both of my parents instilled in me the value of enjoyment and loving what you do, they believe that a person’s best work is done when they enjoy their work. Although I still place this high in my values list I acknowledge that through my undergraduate work in the Human Physiology degree I will have to complete classes and tasks that I will not enjoy, therefore this value may not be completely valid. A goal that I have for myself that I have yet to fully pursue is to do a summer internship in South Africa working in medical clinics, I have not acted completely on this goal because I am afraid of trying hard and wanting it and not getting the internship also being away from my sister and family would be challenging.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1896824-oregon-ducks-new-bowl-uniform-is-latest-innovation-in-jersey-technology

This post by Ryan Davenport was written before the Oregon Ducks played in the Alamo Bowl against the Texas Longhorns and discussed how the team’s uniform has changed and the predicted effect this change will have in the upcoming game and season. I enjoy the fact that Davenport commented on the uniforms that were not warmly welcomed by the fans rather than bragging about the gear the team acquires through the affiliation with Phil Knight and Nike. This post also helped to explain why the team has chosen to change their away and home Jerseys, which has been speculated about many times. The fact that an image and a press release were included in this post also made the post more believable. I also appreciate that Davenport did enough research to know that the new uniforms are intended to keep the players warmer during the winter games while not weighing the players down. I agree with the statement at the end of the blog article that says that change in appearance and style of the football uniforms is a trademark of Oregon’s football team and athletic program.