Author: jacuna@uoregon.edu

Person #1 was a male with medium length black hair. He had some stubble as facial hair and he was also had black gauges. He was wearing a black, gray, and purple flannel shirt with a black graphic t-shirt, with blue jeans that on the bottom you could see were torn and ratted. He did though, have nice gray boot like shoes. He was sitting at a table with his Mac laptop with a textbook. The Mac book had stickers on it, including the state of Oregon with a red heart in the middle, a I love beer, and a anchor like design sticker.  From my own assumptions I would think that he is in his early twenties.  I believe that the values and beliefs of person #1 are strong, even though is appearance looked a little grungy he was taking time to what it looked like to me, homework or studying. I could tell from that small moment that he cared about his classes; he looked tired so he might not have gotten much sleep the night before. Since it’s midterms I could see how tired and stressed he appeared to be at the moment, health wise it looked as if he could get more sleep but we’re students we don’t run on much sleep to begin with.

Person #2 was a female with brunette hair with curling iron waves.  She was wearing a teal blazer with a white blouse, jeans, and black heals.  She has make up on, foundation, blush, mascara, eye liner, and eye shadow.  Accessory wise I could tell she was wearing earrings, she was though was a fairly large fashionable ring on her right index finger.  She was conducting what it looked like interviews, once one interview was over she pulled out a tablet from her nice beige purse, she then made a phone call on her iphone as well before starting the next interview.  She appeared to be in her mid-twenties, and from the looks of it was not a student.  You could tell she was very well put together in the sense of wearing a blazer but pairing it with jeans and heels gave her the laid back kind of vibe. It also seemed she would be one who is outgoing by the seems of her big fashionable ring that screamed for attention.

Person #3 was a male with brown hair on the shorter side. He has a good sculpted beard and also wore black glasses. He was wearing a jean long sleeve topped by a dress sweater with the collar of the jean shirt sticking out. On top of that he wore a black north face rain jacket. On the bottom he wore grayish khaki jeans with nice oxford style shoes with navy polka dot socks. He also wore a very nice looking watch.  From the way he dresses it would appear that he is in his mid-twenties. He seems to care much about how he presents himself to others, so what he wears is something he must put work into.  By the look of his outfit I believe that himself and his family are fairly wealthy, I say this due to the quality of his watch and shoes.

From just appearance it is hard for me to generalize their values and beliefs, in order to determine what those are to someone, I have to get to know them in order to do so.  As described in the reading “ People use appearance to place each other into categories, which aid in the anticipation and interpretation of behavior, and to make decisions about how best to coordinate social activities. “ (Sanders 1)  It is easier to make assumptions about someone based on their appearance than how values and beliefs are demonstrated.  Assumptions that can be made based on appearance can be whether the person is happy or sad, if they can be taken seriously or not, are they stuck up or easy going just to name a few things that can be assumed by someone’s appearance.

In the article by Gopnik, “ The Big Debate: Can Food Be Serious Art” goes back and forth describing the concept that food is art as well as food is not art. To every con in the debate there is a pro describing why food can be considered art. Some of Gopnik’s reasoning that food is not considered art are there is no left over once it is gone, only a few can experience fine food, it doesn’t go beyond the basic sensory pleasures. On the other side of the debate the reasoning behind the idea that food is art is equivalent to food being capable of expressing culture, ethnicity, history, and politics. The counter argument that fine food can only be experienced by only a few is that the same can be said about some of the most famous works of art. An example of this from the article, “ Fewer than 8,000 of their contemporaries ever heard most of what Bach or Mozart wrote.” (Gopnik 2009)

Two aspects that both Gopnik and Tefler mention in both of their articles is the idea that food cannot go beyond the sense of smell and taste. As Tefler writes, “Food and drink can sometimes constitute works of art of a kind peculiar to themselves, appealing mostly to the senses of taste and smell. “ (Tefler 17)Both Gopnik and Tefler on one side hold sides that food does not serve a purpose more than satisfying the senses. Gopniks other side of the argument claims that food serves the purpose of having the ability to talk about history, culture, ethnicity, and politics. This idea of food reaching all different parts of the world also goes along with the video of fast food. Even though the fast food video mentions all of the chemicals that can be found in fast food, it also introduces one of the biggest fast food chain restaurants, McDonalds. McDonalds being one of the biggest fast food franchises has reached many different places in the world. In a way globalization has been conquered with this fast food, as Gopnik explains food can talk about culture, and in this day fast food restaurants and chains play such a role in today’s culture and how many think of food, regardless if they agree with it or not.

Another point of food as art from both articles is the role food plays to all individuals. As Tefler mentions, food serves the purpose of relieving hunger and providing nourishment. Another opinion from the article claims. “Nothing useful deserves to count as work of art.”(Tefler 18) Gopnik supports this idea in which he discusses that food is too functional and cannot serve as serious art. In the counterargument it is described that paintings, photos, and videos all serve their own functional purposes.  Both sides of this argument both describe the idea of food and its function to all individuals. Where food does serve the purpose of relieving hunger and providing nourishment, it can also serve the purpose as mentioned above to history, culture, and ethnicity just to mention a few. The functional reasons to video, photo, and paintings also serve to talk about history, culture, and ethnicity as well. The only difference between the two aspects is that for the most part individuals can spend hours just sitting there and eat their food and be social with their family and friends. As Gopnik mentions while a “meal is just one thing after another” (Gopnik 2009) also talks about how in order for individuals to stay in their seat when watching a movie or at a concert there must be some type of narrative or plot to grab the attention of the audience in order to keep them in their seats.

One aspect that is interesting that Gopnik makes in his article is that “Food never manages to be descriptive or critical.” (Gopnick 2009) He then proposes the question that no other art form threatens its audience as cooking does.  While Tefler expresses another idea of how food corresponds to society. It is expressed that, “Food does not represent anything else, as most literature and visual art does. Representational arts-painting and literature- as telling us something about the world and ourselves.” (Tefler 24) In both aspects of the purpose of food and how it challenges an individual differs. In one idea it is claimed that food threatens its audience more than a dance or painting in that an individual can turn away in disgust, but with food it balances the enjoyment, disgust, satisfaction, excess and a bit of fear as well. This idea that food can or cannot represent anything is something that is up to the individual and the way in which they see the world to begin with.

After reading both articles I have concluded that food is art, just like a painting, photo, or video is. All aspects have the ability to bring everyone closer, to learn about different cultures, politics, ethnicities, and history all in one.

Gopnik, B. (2009, Sept 23). “The Big Debate: Can Food Be Serious Art?” The Washington Post. Retrieved form http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/22/AR2009092203137.html

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.

My initial thought as food as art was that food is art.  After viewing the two videos and reading the article for the week my opinion of food as art changed.  The idea of food is a fascinating one to me, as mentioned before I would have classified food as art but that was before thinking a little bit more deeply into the idea. Such as the Fast Food Presentation suggests to the idea that in this case that the food from McDonalds have different sorts of chemicals added to them, so that they all taste a certain way because of the specific calculations that were made. The idea from the Slow Food presentation suggest of the trend occurring of cooking things from starch such as things were made in the early years. With the idea of both videos, the idea of food as art can be put into question.

When thinking of art, my idea of it is a photograph, painting, or sculptures that is a representation of something to the onlooker. One point in the article, “Food does not represent anything else, as most literature and much visual art does.” (Tefler, 25) When you are sitting in front of a plate of food, most people will not be looking to see the representation of what the food means. To most food is there so one can enjoy the taste or to be social with the people around them. Most do not care to look into find a deeper meaning and appreciate the food that is presented before them. With literature and visual art there is appreciation that most people endure so to find some type of meaning or representation.

Another point, “Food and drink as works of art in the evaluative sense concerns the usefulness of food and drink, it might be claimed that nothing useful deserves to count as work of art.” (Tefler, 18) The way in which this point comes across is very intriguing to the sense of food and its usefulness. In this case it’s saying that nothing “useful” deserves to count as art. Thinking of food, as art as by its usefulness is something I personally haven’t given much thought to before.  Once thinking about this idea more, I do agree. How can something that is so essential to surviving be considered as art? If you look at it, how can something that everyone looks, touches, smells, and tastes be considered art when not a day goes by that most people don’t stop and think about the meaning of the food that is right in front of them.

After reading the assignment, I wouldn’t consider food as minor art, as Tefler goes on to specify food and art. There is a way for people to find a representation in food, evoke some type of emotion. Whether it is by sight, smell, taste, or touch.  Seeing food as art is realistically up to an individual.  My personal view about art would fit into Dissanayake take into postmodernism: art as interpretation.  The idea that sums up my reasoning to food being minor art is, “Artists, just like everybody else, do not see the world in any singularly privileged or objectively truthful way, but rather interpret it according to their individual and cultural sensibilities.” (Dissanayake 19) It is up to the individual in such way that they see the world and how they appreciate the different aspects of art.

1. Describe the term paleoanthropsychobiological. Who coined this term?

Dissanayake coins the term paleoanthropsychobiological in the way to describe brief history of the idea of Western Art. The objective of the term holds different components. The first is that art encompasses all of human history, second it includes all human societies, and lastly that it includes for the fact that art is an emotional need and has emotional effects. (Dissanayake15) While the three components would be the normal for most people, Dissanayake continues by stating through the use of the term, that art must be viewed as a “universal trait of the human species”, that art is a “conceptual ragbag” (Dissanayake15)

2. What does Dissanayake mean by the phrase “making special”? How does it relate to art and to human survival?

Dissanayake claims that one behavior that humans have is to “make special”, especially things that we care deeply for or has a personal significance to someone. In regards to human survival Dissanayake uses the comparison of animals knowing the difference of a twig snapping to a sudden shadow appearing that a predator is close by. As humans and animals we know the difference between ordinary, the everyday, and extra-ordinary events that occur day to day. “Making special” is expressed as a fundamental need, we look for things or occasions to make special to distinguish things from always being ordinary. This idea can also be related to art in the way that artists too transform the ordinary to extraordinary.

 

3. Dissanayake identifies many different theories/movement/periods of art throughout western european history. Name three different theories of art that Dissanayake mentions in her essay. Identify the time period when each theory developed and was prominent. Provide a brief description of the philosophies and ideas that define each theory/movement/period of art. Support your answer with quotes from the reading.

 

Mid-twentieth century, more abstract and elaborate were developed. The idea of abstract expression challenged previous works of acceptable art.  “ Flatness, purity, and picture plane, became the verbal tokens of the transcendent meanings viewers were told they could find in the blobs and washes of paint.” Due to the new abstract movement in art, it became more difficult for the commoner to appreciate the artwork, so during this time appreciating art became more of a elite activity.  It was during this time period that the role of critic became more crucial, when the art was

critics, gallery owners, museum directors, and so on was need as the source of stamping the idea of “work of art” on objects. As Arthur Danto sums up this period of art appreciation, “To see something as art as all demands nothing less than this, an atmosphere of artistic theory, a knowledge of the history of art. “ (Dissanayake 19)

Postmodernism era occurred in the late twentieth century. Postmodernism challenged the idea that art had only a privileged kind of knowledge, it sought out that any “Truth or reality is only a point of view, a representation that comes to us mediated.” (Dissanayake 20)One philosophy is that artists to do not see the world in one specific way. That art can be interpreted according to the person’s individual and cultural experience.

Lastly Dissanayake discusses the paleoanthropsychobiological view of art, which allows for the broadest view on art.  “There is no abstract concept of art, everyone can be an artist- decorating their bodies and possessions, dancing, singing, versifying, performing. “(Dissanayake 21) This goes back to the term coined earlier “making special.” The idea that everyone including artists make something special in order to get out of the ordinary day by day routine that many of us live. Just as we make things special such as going out to eat at a nice restaurants or dressing up, artists to produce art that takes them to a place from ordinary to extraordinary.

Dissanayake discusses the idea of art for life’s sake. In order to understand the way in which art is represented is to have such a broad perspective such that it is a universal need for all.  Ellen touches on the idea that, “There is no known society that does not practice at least one of the what in the West we the arts, and in many groups art-making is among their most important endeavors.” (Dissanayake 1991,21) The idea that art is so tangible to all people regardless of any socioeconomic standing or education is what makes the idea of art so fascinating. Ellen touches on the subject that in the modern world now there in generally a smaller scale of people who practice and appreciate art. The idea that anyone can be an artist is a topic that I find most people don’t consider or realize. As mentioned “everyone may be an artist- decorating their bodies and possessions, dancing, singing, verifying, performing..” (Dissanayake 1991,21) While the word artistic has been tainted so thinking how one’s ability of producing said art is compared to one another, the idea of being artistic is having the ability to express oneself in any and which way one pleases.  In the last paragraph in the articles the take away message to the readers is, “ Art is normal and necessary behavior of human beings that like talking, exercising, playing, working, socializing, learning, loving, and nurturing should be encouraged and developed in everyone.” (Dissanayake 1991, 26) The way in which the articles ends is very refreshing, allowing the audience to take in the idea that art is just another way in which we can live our everyday life. Art can be personalized for each individual, by his or her tastes, current life situations, or learning about history. There are endless possibilities to what “art” can mean for a person, and how different people can interpret a painting or sculpture and have completely different views of what the said art means to them. Art is just another part of life that allows us to grow and learn about you, others, and about the artists behind the work. Being artistic doesn’t mean being great at creating a piece of work, but allowing yourself to express yourself freely and interpret the way you see the world to others. There is no wrong way in art, and that is what makes it so intriguing.

Family

Loyalty

Friendship

Independence

Security

Integrity

Personal accomplishment

Wisdom

Enjoyment

Location

Leadership

Health

Personal development

Service

Community

Creativity

Wealth

Expertness

Prestige

Power

 

Today I went on a hike, talked to my mom on the phone, did homework, cooked, and hung out with my friends. The values that represent each of these activities are family, friendship, independence, personal accomplishment, enjoyment, and security.

 

My top five values are family, loyalty, friendship, independence, and security. From the activities I did today four out of the five values are represented.  Family the first value on my list, I take to heart and carry it with me all the time. It is something that I have inherited from my mother. She has always put family first above anything. An example, growing up she would work the night shift just so my older brother and I would see her in the mornings before school and see her when we came home from afterschool. I have also learned that at the end of the day your family are the only people you can truly trust, so for me even though I live in a seven hours from my family now, I make sure to call them everyday.  Loyalty is my second value and I honor it as much as I can with other people, such as my family and friends, but it is something that I hope to receive back from friends of mine. Friendship is my third value and friendships are near and dear to me. I am not one of those people that have a large amount of friends, I rather have friends that I know I can trust and can have fun with. For me in friendship it’s quality over quantity. Independence and security are my four and five on the values list. To me these go hand in hand. I am a very independent person, but I fight for my independence all the time especially being that I grew up in a Mexican household, I am constantly struggling to show my parents that I have grown up and can rely on myself, and make decisions by myself without them constantly having to check up on me or question me who I am because of it.  Security later on in life would ensure that I would be able to achieve that independence that I have always wanted.

 

Power and wealth are two belief patterns that still have authority in my thinking but I can sometimes acknowledge that they are no longer valid. I know what both power and wealth can do to a person; I have witnessed it and that is something I never want to be. That is why I do not have power and wealth very high on my list of values, while I do want to make money in the future, it’s the my number on priority to do so.

 

Goals that I have for myself is to be someone in life that I can be happy about being. Having a career that I don’t dread to get up in the morning to go to. Being able to start a project or set a goal and actually finishing. What stands in my way of acting upon these goals is myself. Being happy with myself in the future will come down to me and the decisions leading up to that said moment of happiness. The career path that I choose while is kind of up to the job market at the time; at the end will be up to me in which direction I choose.  One goal that I have for myself right now is to run the Eugene half-marathon, I’ve always wanted to try and run a half marathon but I just never start training for it so it’s one of those start and you better finish goals that I have for myself.

To start off, I think this read was very interesting. I’d never put the thought into the reasoning as to how and why we each have our own values.

A quote within the read that really stuck out to me was, “Personal values matter a great deal. Without them, we cannot live at all, for they are just as essential as air, food, and water, and protection from elements.” (Lewis, 1990) At first I didn’t believe that values held such a strong importance in one’s lives, but thinking more about the idea I would agree. Values that one holds are the way in such one lives their life, how they make specific decisions day to day.  I personally feel that my values are what keep me going from time to time.

Another part in the reading that I really liked was  “There is a good deal of evidence that human beings are not primarily driven by genetically determined instincts but are rather free to make their own choices.” (Lewis, 1990) I think this idea holds very true. If you look at, each member in a family all hold their individual values. Some of those values may be shared within each member in the family because all have held the same experience, but in most cases not everyone will hold those same values. This personally holds true for me; religion has always played a large role in my upbringing. I was born and raised as a Catholic, but for the most part I was more as a cradle Catholic. It wasn’t until I came to the UO that I have made my religion my own, and now has helped me to mold some of my values. My brother on the other hand is an Atheist, and has his reasoning to not believe in a God. We both look at things a little differently but at the end of it hold some of the same values.  As the article goes on to explain, the way values are tailored is by a combination of the four interior mental modes and the two synthetic mental modes.  There are endless combinations of each mental mode can signify a difference in values to individuals, but that’s what makes the idea of values beautiful. Everyone is entitled to make their own choices and determine how their values will help define who they are.

I had remembered seeing this picture  surfacing the web of Jennifer Lawrence. I immediately looked at the two pictures. I was surprised to see how almost identical the two pictures were, but was saddened me was that the magazine would airbrush Jennifer when her original picture looked amazing to begin with. In a society where there is this idea of what a perfect body should look like, but when even those in the public don’t even match up to that expectation, what kind of message does that leave?

I agree with Jessie when she brings up the point of  who comes up with what to “fix” on a person on a magazine cover. It has become okay for many magazines to do this to whatever star is on the cover, giving the audience such a false hope of having this so called idealistic body.

Both men and women suffer from some sort of body insecurity, it doesn’t help that people we see on t.v. shows and movies who are already expected to look a certain way, are put on a magazine cover or promotional poster then in fact they are touched up to fix those so called imperfections that are deemed unacceptable to show to the world.

Going back to Jennifer Lawrence’s magazine cover, as Jessie mentions in her blog post is that Jennifer has repeatedly told magazines to not airbrush her. She tries to be a good role model in the sense so be proud of your body and all imperfections with it, but how far must someone go to get the point across?

 

http://www.20-nothings.com/2013/12/what-are-we-supposed-to-do-about-way.html#comment-form