Month: April 2014

The first person that I observed was a young lady.  I think she looks to be about in her early twenties.  She has dirty blond hair that goes to her shoulders.  She is wearing a black sweat shirt that zips up in the front and a pair of shorts, and has red painted finger nails and makeup on her face.  From what she is wearing and how she looks I am assuming that she is female.  She was walking with friends laughing, so I also assume that she is a happier person.  Because she is wearing shorts, I believe that one of her values is not keeping her skin covered up.  Her skin is also very light, so I am assuming that she is has an American cultural background. By looking at her red painted manicure and the makeup she is wearing, I think that she values having a nice appearance.  When I assumed that she values looking nice because of her makeup and nail polish, I think that this says something about my values.  I think this shows that I think makeup and accessories help make a person look nice.

The second person I observed has short hair, tattoos, and piercings.  They are wearing baggy shorts and a short sleeve bright blue shirt.  I believe that this individual is male.  He has light skin and his tattoos have writing in English, so I am also assuming that he has an American cultural background.  I think that their tattoos and piercings demonstrate the belief that people should be free to do whatever they wish with their bodies and valuing self-expression is important.  I am assuming this man is in his mid-twenties based on how he is dressed.  I also feel like this man is emotionally healthy because of the bright colors he is wearing.  These assumptions say that I believe that bright colors represent happiness and positive emotions.  These assumptions also say that I value letting people be expressive of what they believe by what they wear or how they modify their bodies.

The third person that I observed was someone that I am assuming is a male.  He is tall, has nicely groomed hair, looks very in shape, and is wearing a very nice looking suit with a tie.  He looks very serious, and almost unhappy.  Because this man is wearing a suit that looks expensive, I am assuming that he probably has a good job and makes a good amount of money.  I am also assuming that he is probably in his mid-forties.  I also feel like he is probably very healthy since he looks very in-shape physically.  I think that his clothes demonstrate that he values his appearance.  I think that his dress also demonstrates the belief that working hard is important.  These assumptions show that I believe that working hard can lead to a successful future with a good job.  But these assumptions also show that I do not believe that success leads to happiness, because this man looks unhappy.

In Andrea Borghini’s article Can Food Be Art? He discusses reasons why food cannot be considered art.  The first reason that Borghini gives for why food is not art is the caducity of food.  Borghini states, “that food is fleeting: a sculpture, a painting, or a temple may last for centuries, maybe millennia; the delicious food that the restaurant El Bulli used to prepare just a few years ago is long and gone” (Borghini).  What he is trying to argue is that because food is made to be eaten and disappear, it cannot be considered art.  The second reason that Borghini mentions is the subjectivity of food.  He says that, “one may object that gastronomic experiences are more subjective than other forms of aesthetic experiences.  This is not simply because foods are fleeting, but also because taste is a destructive sense: you’ve got to destroy what you taste” (Borghini).  Because everyone must taste and because no two people taste the exact same thing, taste is seen as an individual affair, and no two people can experience the exact same experience when eating something.  The third and final reason that Borghini argues is the meaning of food.  He believes, “that food cannot vehicle meaning” (Borghini).  What he is trying to say is that food itself does not carry meaning, but more the gesture behind the food is what carries the meaning.  Because of these three reasons, Borghini believes that food is not art.

In Elizabeth Telfer’s article Food As Art she mentions something similar to what Borghini mentioned about the subjectivity of food.  Telfer argues that, “Because people have to eat them to appreciate them, and because each person necessarily eats a different part of the dish, it might seem that in the sphere of food no one can appreciate a complete work of art” (Tefler, 2002, p. 17).  Wha  t both Tefler and Borghini are saying is that there is a problem with food being art because each person consuming the food only gets to taste part of it, so no two people will get to ever experience the exact same piece of art.  Tefler also brings up the issue of dishes of food being destroyed, much like Borghini does.  What Borghini does not mention in his argument that Tefler does, is the structure of food.  Tefler states that people often appreciate the structure of food, instead of appreciating what aesthetic is supposed to be appreciated, taste and smell which is immediately destroyed when someone eats a dish of food.

Unlike in Borghini’s article, Tefler discusses many issues with why food cannot but art, but also discusses why food is a minor art.  She claims, “that the art of food is minor because it is not only simple but also limited in three important ways: food is necessarily transient, it cannot have meaning and it cannot move us” (Tefler, 2002, p.24).  Both Tefler and Borghini mention how food cannot have meaning, but Tefler argues that this makes food a minor art, while Borghini argues that this does not make food an art at all.  Tefler talks about how food does in a way have meaning, but not in the same way as major art forms do.  Food is unable to represent deeper meanings or see things differently in the world or ourselves by looking at a piece of food, much like you can with a painting or other types of visual art.  Tefler also discusses how art does not necessarily need to be representational to be considered art, while Borghini fails to address this argument.  Although you may not be able to represent parts of the world through food Tefler argues that, “it creates its own world of tastes and smells” (Tefler, 2002, p. 25).  Even though food may not represent other things in the world, it still creates something that is unique and can be aesthetically pleasing to those who consume it.  Both of these articles make similar points towards the argument of food being art, but what Borghini fails to do for his arguments is discuss the ways that these can be disproven, much like Tefler does towards the end of her article.  She identifies the major issues that many people have found with food being art, and proves that food can still be considered art even with these issues being true.  In the last paragraph of her article she makes it clear that there are two distinct problems we have with food being art and these are, “We need to strike a balance between the aesthetic claims of the food on a particular occasion and the social claims of that occasion.  We also need to find a middle way between two unsatisfactory attitudes to the aesthetic dimension of food” (Tefler, 2002, p. 25).  If these two problems can be overcome then we can start to distinguish when food is considered art.

Borghini, A. (n.d.). Can Food Be Art?. About.com Philosophy. Retrieved April 27, 2014, from                                                                        http://philosophy.about.com/od/Philosophical-Theories-Ideas/a/Can-Food-Be-Art.htm

Telfer, E. (2002). Food as art. In Neill, A. & Ridley, A (Eds.), Arguing About Art: Contemporary Philosophical Debates (2 ed., pp. 9-27). New York: Routledge.

When I read the title of this week’s discussion, “Is Food Art?” I automatically thought to myself that yes I do believe food is art.  After watching the videos about fast and slow food I began to question whether or not food is actually art.  I believe that slow food is a lot more artistic than fast food.  In the beginning of the video on fast food the narrator describes that what we are really getting when going to a fast food restaurant is, “carbonated water, ice, sugar, corn syrup, food coloring, and unnatural flavor.”  This is not something that I believe is art.  In Dissanayake’s article she describes the word techne as, “having a correct understanding of the principles involved” (16).  Techne translates into art but describes other mundane activities, which I believe may include cooking.  In this sense cooking and food could be considered an art.  I think that many people who work at fast food restaurants do not do it with the intentions of making food that appeals aesthetically to humans, I think they do it just to give themselves a job.  I think that for food and cookery to be considered an art there needs to be reasons behind it.  I agree with Telfer’s article that food is a minor art.  I agree that, “We must conclude that works of art in food, whether creative or interpretative, cannot gain the same stature as those of greater permanence” (25).  This statement proves that food as art is a minor art.  This article also discusses a lot about how art does not represent something else, but I do not believe that art necessarily has to have a deeper meaning behind it.  Food is something that appeals to our senses and something that people enjoy eating and creating, and for these reasons I think that food should be considered an art.

The discussion of what art is, is a discussion that has been happening for a very long time.  When it comes down to it, there is not one specific answer to this question, but instead many people have developed their own ideas about what they consider art to be.  In Ellen Dissanayake’s article What Is Art For? She introduces the adjective “palaeoanthropsychobiological” to describe a new way to look at art.  This adjective suggests that art includes all of human history and human societies, and also that humans have a psychological and emotional need for art.  This term introduces the idea that, “art must be viewed as an inherent universal (or biological) trait of the human species” (15).

Another term that Dissanayake uses is “making special.”  This term describes a behavioral tendency that humans have to make things and activities that one cares about important and different from everyday ordinary things.  Being able to make special, gives humans the ability to differentiate between ordinary and extra-ordinary.  Without this humans would not be able to survive.  This connects back to the beginning of the human species when red colors were found in areas far from where they naturally occur due to colorings and marking of things like bodies and utensils.  This may not seem like art to us today, but it shows that humans were taking the effort to make special of something and differentiate it from the normal in order to survive.  As humans have evolved we combine this idea of special with other abilities to do more than survive, but to create other things that are special such as pieces of art.

Along with describing one way that art is currently be seen as, Dissanayake also discusses many theories of art from different periods of time.  One of the periods of time she discusses is the Greek and medieval times.  During this time authors most likely did not consider art the same as we do today.  They used the word techne instead of art which meant, “having a correct understanding of principles involved” (16).  This word was not just used for things such as painting, sculpting, or drawing, but was also used for things such a fishing or chariot driving.  The arts during medieval times were used as a service of religion.

Another period of time that Dissanayake discusses is the eighteenth century.  This was a time of great change and the term “modernity” is what we now call the combination of how many social and intellectual trends came together.  This time period brought the idea of modernism and art as an ideology.  One subject that became popular was aesthetics, “a concern with elucidating principles such as taste and beauty that govern all the arts and indeed make tem not simply paintings or statues but examples of (fine) art” (17).  This idea was that appreciating art took a special kind of mind that had a disinterested attitude and, “is separate from one’s own personal interest in the object, its utility, or its social or religious ramifications” (17).  This disinterest of art allowed those observing artwork to be able to appreciate it, even if it not art from their culture or time period.

During the mid-twentieth century the idea of postmodernism and art as interpretation came into play.  This idea suggests, “that what is said (or written) about a work is not only necessary to its being art, but is indeed perhaps more important than the work itself” (19).  Postmodernists believe that art needs to be interpreted and have another meaning besides its physical appearance.  This theory allows artists to explain their thoughts behind their pieces of artwork and for viewers to interpret pieces of art as they want and that they need to have a knowledge of art history.

The idea that “art must be viewed as an inherent universal (or biological) trait of human species, as normal and natural as language, sex, sociability, aggression, or any of the other characteristics of human nature,” is an idea that I have never heard before.  I’ve always considered art a very important part of culture, but I have never thought about art being considered a human characteristic or trait.  Every culture has some sort of unique art that is significant to that culture.  I think that this alone proves that art is a very important characteristic of the human species.  This article discusses the significance of art in rituals among different groups of people throughout time.  Whether it was dancing, singing, painting, or another form of art, these rituals and ceremonies represented some of these group’s most important beliefs.  In our culture today art may not as often be used in rituals, but the characteristics of art still help shape the way we are today.  Art is everywhere in all cultures in many different forms.  I think that in one way or another everyone depends on some sort of art.  In the past people would depend on the art in their rituals to help with a hunt, bring rain, or help them prosper in one way or another.  These rituals may not be as common today but that does not mean that people do not still depend on art.  Because all cultures are dependent on art in one way or another, I believe that it proves that art is an important characteristic of human beings.  Another part of this reading that I found interesting was that “everything is not equally meaningful or valid.”  I think that everything depends on perspective and that even if something is not meaningful to one person, it may be extremely meaningful to another.

My ordered list of life values:

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

Two of my top five values are friendship and family.  To me these two these are very similar because I consider my family my friends and my closest friends my family.  This weekend I spent some time in Las Vegas with friends.  This activity shows the importance of two of my top values, friendship and enjoyment.  I believe it is important to be happy and to enjoy life.  Almost every day of the week I spend my whole day either in class or at work and a good amount of my free time working on school work, so I find it very important to take some time every now and then to do something extra enjoyable with friends and or family.  After returning home today I was feeling very tired and sick.  Another one of my top five values is health.  Because I was feeling ill today I took some time to take a very long nap, make some healthy food, and take some vitamins to help my immune system.  These activities all represent my top five values very well.  After reflecting on today I found it very interesting how no matter what I am doing, I am almost always pursuing my values even without thinking about it.

I think that one of the most important beliefs that I inherited from my family was the importance of being happy.  I think this connects back to one of my top five values, enjoyment.  In my family I was always taught to be happy with what you have, even if you don’t have much.  I believe that this belief is still valid today and is something that I very much still believe in.  I was never raised in a family that had a certain religion everyone believed in, my family was very open to letting us grow up to believe in what we want.  I feel very happy that I was born into a family that was very open and allowed me and my siblings to grow up believing what we wanted.

I agree with this week’s reading that defining human values and how they are determined is a complex topic.  I agreed with the statement, “it should become clear on reflection that their are very few interior mental modes through which we come to ‘believe’ or ‘know’ anything” (9).  Upon looking at my own personal values, I realized that these four modes, sense experience, deductive logic, emotion, and intuition, are the four basic modes that I base my values and beliefs on, also along with the two synthetic modes, authority and scientific.  Although I find these modes quite accurate, I do not believe that everyone will agree with them, which is another big point in this reading that I agree with.  I liked how this reading gave an example of someone who disagreed with these modes and believed that divine revelation should be considered an important aspect of defining human values.  I agreed with the author’s logic on divine revelation can just be seen as an example of sense experience and after discussing this states that, “the reader agreed that revelation could be viewed as a special case of sense experience.”  This example shows that how people define values is both different among individuals and also that individuals often change the way they see values.  By agreeing with the author, the reader started to use deductive logic and sense experience to determine her values instead of revelation.  Although I believe that these modes are major aspects of how an individual comes to believe or think something is important, they may not be the only modes.  Defining personal values and beliefs is a very broad topic and I do not think it can be condensed to just one single idea, but I agree that it can be condensed to a few basic ideas that define how people decide to believe something.

The blog that I am responding to is called When On Earth.  The specific blog entry that I thought was interesting is called “See How These 5 Wrecked Places Turned Into Art Hubs.”  This is the link.  The first place is in Nizhny Novgorod, Russia and are spray painted pictures of very alive looking faces.  These paintings are done by Nikita Nomerz.  I think they are very cool because they pop out on something that would other wise look for dull and ordinary.  The second place is a run down nursing school, that from the outside looks very fallen apart and abandoned.  On the inside the walls are covered with pictures of batman characters.  I like this one a lot because the paintings are all very colorful.  From the outside of the building it looks very boring, but the inside is covered with awesome colorful batman pictures.  The third place is a rusty ship in North Wales.  The goal of a group of artists is to cover up the ship completely with spray painted pictures.  When you look at the images that they have painted it is almost hard to tell that there is a rusty old ship underneath.  The fourth place is in Berlin, Germany and is a locked up Nazi/Soviet military base.  This location is spray painted with haunting looking images.  Some of which look almost 3-D as if they are really there.  The fifth place is in Miami, USA in a Puerto Rican neighborhood.  All over the walls are unbelievably amazing pieces of art.  I think this blog is very interesting because it shows that you may first look at something that may not think is very attractive but if you look harder it may be something very beautiful. 
Continue reading “When On Earth Response” →