People Watching.

As I sit in Starbucks, I first notice a girl that has similar taste then I personally do. She wore Nike leggings; Nike shoes and an Oregon black zip up that has a green O on the chest. She generally just looks like an athletic person, which is why I think I noticed her first. She has strawberry blond hair that is put up in a straight ponytail. She doesn’t look much taller then 5’4 and is around 20 years old I would guess.

Looking at her appearance and what she where’s I assume she probably is on a sports team just like me, and most likely is more like me when it comes to culture and religion. Dressing like the way she did, I assume like me that she is hard working, dedicated and fit. She looked fit and toned which makes me think she is an athlete. She was also eating carrots and rice cakes with peanut butter, which are all healthy snacks, which makes me assume she watches what she eats. Her face expressions make me think she is laid back and easy going because she seemed like she was laughing at everything. In general I don’t really think any of these are bad assumptions to have. I think since I categorize myself with her so I am not assuming the worse. But I think some people might assume, skinny, really healthy eating= anorexic. Which is an awful stereotype to put on someone I think.

The next guy that I saw, he was sitting next to me reading the newspaper, looked like it was politics. This tells me that he likes to keep up with society and today’s news. This also tells me that he seems knowledgeable and enjoys being educated. He was an older guy and I assume he is around his 40’s. He has a watch on that looks pretty expensive, along with a nice suit, shoes and slicked back hair. His appearance makes him look like he is a successful man and a well off person. I would most likely think he is Rich and has tons of money, but I think that’s just a typical stereotype people have. I think he is similar to me in a way, because he seeks education and he obviously works hard at what ever he does. I realize that all of these assumptions are based on all of what he is wearing.

I see a Caucasian college male, probably nineteen or twenty years of age, rummaging through his stuff frantically trying to find something. From his posture and what he is wearing I can tell that he values a laid back lifestyle. He appears to be wearing a ‘golden state’ jersey so I am assuming he is from a stable middle class family from somewhere in California. Also, from what I can infer about his speech, he much also value education and seeks a higher quality of life. Due to the aforementioned basketball jersey as well as the backwards hat, I’m assuming he may be an inconsiderate jerk despite his alarming vocabulary. Granted I’m using mostly physical features to build this stranger’s character shows that I value general stereotypes that my peers might notice as well. In retrospect, I’ve come to realize that we, as a society, fall back on stereotyping complete strangers.

There are so many different assumptions and stereotypes to have, some are better then others. Its crazy to see how by just looking at one person for a little while what you can come up with or figure out about them. But in general, I don’t think its right that people judge people by only there appearance.

The Big Debate: Can Food Be Serious Art?

Is FOOD ART?

 In the article “The Big Debate: Can Food be Serious Art? They bring up both sides about how food can be art, and how it cannot be. It is from a newspaper called the Washington post. The way they bring up both sides of the argument is very simple and easy to follow and I think attracts the readers. Through out the article they explain why food can be art, and then immediately right after the statement they show the other point of view. They show the counter argument. I think since this subject is not universal and there are a broad variety of opinions, I think it is good that they show different point of views and they don’t narrow in on one side of it. It makes the article more interesting by seeing both sides; it brings up more knowledge and thoughts. It brings up sides of the argument that you never would of thought of.

In the big debate, they explained that food cant be art because how a meal is just one thing after another. They counter argued that by saying it can be art by saying how even most music calls on a tonal plot to keep the audience involved, as well just like food. In the article of Telfer “is Food Art”? also brings up an argument like the one in the debate. She explains  “Suppose a chef working for Marks and Spencer creates a superb pie, which is then turned out by thousand. Are all the pies works of art? Or is the abstract recipe the only work of art?” (17) which relates back to the debate of the article that a meal is just one thing after another. This argument I consider more the abstract recipe is the actual piece of art. The repetition of the food making over and over again shouldn’t be considered art. I think personally the repetition of making the plates of food over and over again takes the art out of it because you don’t put that “astethetic” taste into all of the plates made anymore.  In the Telfers article, she explains that aesthetic reaction is necessary for something to be considered art.  Our reaction to aesthetic is, “ based soley on how the object appears to the senses (Telfer,9). I think after meal after meal, or pie after pie that reaction comes like more of a routine, so it shouldn’t be considered art.

In this big debate: Can Food Be Serious Art? Another argument it brought up is that food cant be art because big fancy restaurants main goal, are not all about serving art. They only care about the status and money of the restaurants and how to keep them successful.  In Telfers article there is a similar argument to this argument. When she brings up when people or even restaurants in this case have different purposes like the success instead of the actual piece of art is not considered an aesthetic reaction but should be called a “non- instrumental reaction” instead. A non-instrumental reaction is when you don’t care about the benefit of others. (Telfer 10)  You’re happier about the actual success of the restaurants then the art. Relating to this argument, I think restaurants that are chains and fast food restaurants are under this “non-instrumental reaction” category, not the aesthetic reaction category.  The fast food and chain restaurants only care about the success of there own food and don’t care about the actual quality of it. The restaurants that take time to bring out the food to their customers and care about each plate falls under the aesthetic reaction instead of the non- instrumental reaction.

In the end, the reason I like this article is because this article I found does not end with a conclusion with an actual answer of “is food art”.  This article correlates with my opinion of the subject. I think there are different points of views and different thoughts and I don’t think it will ever be ever universal. They both bring up great point of views. By showing the different points of views, it shares the knowledge of both points of views to everyone.

(2009 Sept 23). The Big Debate: Can Food Be Serious Art?” [Washington Post]. Retrieved Feburary 02, 2014 from <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/22/AR2009092203137.html>.

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.

Objectives:

• Explore the notion of food as an artform.
• Consider cultural differences in the production and consumption food.

IS FOOD ART?

I really enjoyed Elizabeths Telfers’ article Food as Art. The questions that she brings up about if food should be considered a piece of art are all really fascinating. She also brings up the broad variety of interpretations and outlooks people have on this subject.

A big part of  article is about the meaning of  aesthetic reaction. What does the word “aesthetic” really mean? In the article “Food as art” there are some points that are brought up. Aesthetic reactions relate generally to tastes and smells, we can distinguish liking the taste and smell of food from improving it and third, “the non-neutral, vivid and non-instrumental reaction to tastes and smells can be combined with a judgment.” I think this is all saying that aesthetics is anything that invokes any of the 5 sensory responses.

One of the statements she brings up is about what she considers an aesthetic reaction. The statement is about liking something because it’s healthy for you instead of the actual look and pleasure of it. “if I like the way cottage cheese contrasts in flavor and texture with rye bread” (Telfer,17) that’s a aesthetic reaction. But if you like it because its “low-calrie and high in fiber” that’s not an aesthetic reaction. (17) That is not involved with your sensory. My question is, how do you distinguish if it’s a sensory function or not.

Do people value the sense of different things more then others? I think some people value food more then others, some people value the taste, the smell and the look a lot more then others. Who ever values the senses more, I think have the right to consider food art just like certain jobs/artists. Just like in Ellen Dissanayake’s essay, she thinks art is suppose to have meaning and mean something to someone. So i think food can mean alot more to people then others. In that case, i think it can be considered “art” but not to everyone.

When I look at my food, I don’t consider what I make a piece of art because I don’t put time and effort into my food. I don’t put the finishing touches on my plates. But I can see a chef for that matter saying there food is a piece of art.  Making food is there job as well as their enjoyment. They thrive to make that perfect plate and perfect taste. That example I think they have the right to call that art.

I think the difference between fast food and slow food, is the art and process of it. Fast food like they said in the video, its not a process, you get the same thing every time. So i agree with the video that fast food is not a art. Staying home and cooking your own meal, that is more of an art. More of a variety and you have ability to make it which ever and what ever you want. You can use your aesthetic reaction, your senses, to make that food. Which I consider ART!

Reflection: 

After i read this weeks artifact about food, it was cool to actually think what food i thought was art or not art. At first, i never really categorized my food as a piece of art. After all these readings, clips, i really had different opinions about it.

This article from Telfer, Food as Art talked about different pieces of art that were shown through food. There are a couple of aspects such as culture, emotional, tradition and style that all play a factor in the consideration of food being art. At first, i never thought as my food, i made as art because i never put the time and effort into to make it worthy. But I now realize people like chefs, where making food is there job should be considered a form of art. There Job is to make the perfection in there work, in there food. They have emotional attachments to there food. Telfer explains that when chefs make there food, its intended to be “savoured, appraised, thought about, discussed-and many eaters consider them in this way” (14). Which i think this statement is quite accurate. When you put that much time and effort into your work, i would consider it as a piece of “art”. For example, Here is a video of one of the best chefs in the world, proving how much spices and different things you can put in ONE DISH to make it your own. He puts his time and effort into cooking, Making it a  PIECE OF ART.

I was also interested in the 2 presentations about the Fast food and slow food. Art is definitely should be considered a process. What makes Fast food not considered art is because its not a process. Staying home and cooking your meals, takes time and consideration on what to make and what to put in the plate your making. The video that was shown above, represents what slow food is all about. You get the ability to make it taste exactly as you want. There is most definitely differences in what should be considered as art or what should not be.

Future:

After reading this article and clips, I want to be more aware of what I’m eating. I want to consider what is piece of art and what isn’t. Being in my own apartment, I have the chance to create my own food and pieces of “art”. I think i will appreciate more what I’m making and eating since I am making it . I want to keep learning and surrounding my self with food that is known as “art”

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.

Next Page

Portfolio

Artifact 1: Life Value Assesment

Artifact 2: What is Art for Essay

Artifact 4: Personal Adornment 

Bibliography

I think this piece of Ellen Dissanayake about art brings up many interesting topics about a simple word “art”. Its so crazy to think of other cultures point of view of what art is. Art has evolved over years and has developed?

When I think of the word “art”, I think of anything that a person can describe them self with. Which I guess in a way is really broad.

The” Romantic Rebellion” section I thought was really interesting. Ellen Dissanayake explained Individualism as a  way to have tradition, custom and authority and it has emotional satisfaction that most likely relieved people. (pg 17)  Each century, art has progressed and evolved. It is so weird to think that art used be only in the church or only in specific areas, but now has evolved to so much more and it became a form to please the outsiders and the public view.  Each century, art became more modern and became a world in its self.

There are so many different perspectives when someone looks at art and evaluates it.  There is the term Disinterest that she brought up, where you don’t have to understand the actual piece of art to enjoy it. It can be from different cultures and religions but yet you can still enjoy it.  As well as the art for arts sake, people think art has no purpose but just to provide people with different opportunities and experiences.(pg 18)

Art has evolved into something that is way more exotic, as well as outrageous.

I really like the statement “ there is no appreciation of art with out interpretation” because you have to have your own thoughts to understand the piece. You can explain your theories of different things through your own work, you don’t always have to use words but show it through different ways.

But in the end, I think the question is still, Is art universal?  In different times through out history, it was considered universal and as it evolved, now it might not be universal. She states that art isn’t universal when she is talking about postmodernism. Its “conceptually constructed by individuals whose perceptions are necessarily limited”(pg 19)  so does this mean every individual has different point of views, and has there own idea on what is art? Is there not a clear definition of art?

Art is so complex and I’ts amazing how year after year it keeps evolving. In my opinion, there will be tons of different opinions of art and I don’t think you will ever be able to actually define it, which makes it not universal.

Dissanayake, E. (1991). What is art for? In K. C. Caroll (Ed.). Keynote adresses 1991 (NAEA Convention), (pp.15-26). Reston, VA: National Art Education Association.

OBJECTIVES:

• Become familiar with the basic relationship of human values to psychological and philoshopical endeavors.
• Understand that values are formed from external and internal drives of an individual.
• Explore one’s own value system.

Life Value Assessment

Family

Friendship

Enjoyment

Personal Accomplishment

Health

Loyalty

Personal development

Location

Leadership

Security

Service

Prestige

Integrity

Independence

Expertness

community

Wisdom

Wealth

Creativity

Power

 My Top 5 life values I chose were Family, friendship, and enjoyment, Personal Accomplishment, Health. I think all these life values accurately portray who I am and actually came out through what I did today already.

I’m a big family person; being with my family makes me so happy. Even though I’m across the country from all of them, I still find a way to be with them somehow. I make sure I call them everyday, to fill them in with my life. It doesn’t no matter how far I am away from my family, I know they will always have my support and we will all stay close, connected and have each other’s backs.

As for Friendship, I think the key of happiness is your friend. It doesn’t matter where you are, it matters who your with. I went to practice today, and I love being with my best friends. Just like my family, my friends are positive, fun, lively people, and we all keep each other laughing.

Enjoyment. It is always important too love what your doing. On my Long Run today, even though you would tell people you have to go run 13 miles right now, most people would dread it. But for me, if you really love what your doing and have people surrounding you that are doing the same thing and keep it fun, there is nothing better.

Personal Accomplishments. Everyday I run, workout, eat well to accomplish a personal goal. I think its important to have goals, even if its something small or even something huge. I work hard everyday to get closer to that 15:30 5k goal.

I think being fit, happy with friends and family all leads to good health. I think all my values all correlate to each other.

 I think my family instilled great values and beliefs in me. I wouldn’t say im a very religious person probably because my family isn’t very religious as well. But they brought me up to work hard, to be respectful, never give up, to be loyal. How they brought me up, made me who I am today. It make me the runner, the athlete I am today. I have tons of goals in my life. At this point in my life, my goals are mainly pointed towards my track and field goals. My goals are more time related,  I want to go sub 9 flat in the 3k, I want to go sub 15:30 in the 5k! which are all high goals. But I believe in my self  and set high goals for my self.  There are most definitely things that are holding me back right now, such as lyme disease. But I have faith, I will be back and healthy in no time. You know who helps me everyday to stay positive? My Family, Friends and my love of the sport.

Reflection:

I honestly loved this assignment. Having to pick what values was the most important to you was awesome and even more challenging then i thought.  Doing this assignment made me realize what was actually the most important to me. I realized that even though I’m so focused on my success and hard work on the track, I’m always going to value friendship and family first. They are they people that got me to where i am today. They are the people that truly make me happy Day in and day out. Below is a picture of my Mom and I at my brothers wedding. Family is what i really value the most, I always want to make sure i am there for them.

This assignment made me realize what was an External or an  internal drive. For example, what i did for my self or rather for my family. I think my first 2 choices of Family and Friendship is more of an Internal choice. For myself i want to be around my Family and Friends more then anything. They make everything in the world that much better. As well, i think health and Enjoyment that i picked is also a internal drive. You want that for your self. You want the enjoyment or health in life.  I think Personal accomplishment that i picked in my top 5, is both a external and internal drive. As much i want to impress my family and my peers, i want to do it for my self. I work hard for my friends and family but as well to achieve those high goals that i set for myself. The picture below are my Friends. These people are the people who I’m with every day and make me happy. They make me want to be the best that i can be.

Your own values i think is hard to actually put in order because everything, Like Lewis said ““Many people seem not only barraged by an informational overload of conflicting and ill-defined value systems; they also seem increasingly unsure about how to respond” (Lewis, 18) By having us pick our top values, allowed us to look at our values that we fully don’t understand. It allowed us to make us realize what is more of an internal or an external value. Which I think is an important concept to know about your self. Its important to know what you do for yourself or for others.

Future:

As i grow up, i know that my friends will always be there for me. I might add some friends to the circle, and i might lose touch with some. But in the end, My family is always going to be my family, and my friends are always going to my friends. They are always going to be with me in my UPS and DOWNS, through laughter and crying. Thats what makes them so special. In the Picture above, My brothers and I always keep each other laughing and we always have a good time together. This picture really portrays how much i value them.

Next Page

Portfolio

Artifact 1: Life Value Assesment

Artifact 2: What is Art for Essay

Artifact 3: Is Food Art?

Artifact 4: Personal Adornment 

Bibliography 

Values? Personality traits? Related?

I think this reading about personal values is very interesting. The section that really stuck out to me was the part where it explains that “but we might still be controlled by the influence of genes on our underlying personality or, alternatively, by peer pressure, “ (pg 8) I think this statement is pretty true.  I don’t think there is a particular gene that makes you think different ways and that MAKES you have different values and beliefs. But the genes underlie your personality and make you who you are.  Certain traits like easy going, relaxed, chill, uptight, confident, respectful, make up who you are and how you act towards a certain subject. Personally, I think these traits are related to how you think and as well, how you act on your values. Such as, if you are an uptight driven person, most likely your going to have values and stick to them. If you are a person that is laid back and easy going, you are going to have values, but your most likely not going to be as strict with keeping up with them or be outspoken about them because you might not have a strong stand point towards anything.

I don’t think we really choose are values, but I think how you act on them, and how serious you are about your values and beliefs all comes out through your own personality traits.

Another interesting statement that stuck out to me was “that with out values human behavior would be directionless, chaotic, and ultimately self- destructive”.(pg 8)  I think this statement is completely accurate. If an individual did not have values, they might think that stealing, or killing is an okay thing to do. With out values, the world would be destructive and dangerous.

This whole article is very interesting, and brings up different points of views of how people might see things.