My 10 words that help represent what it means for me to be an artist:

instinct
hands/use of body
imagination
emotion
trial and error
sketching/sketchbooks/ideas
creation
messy
expression
individuality

From our reading, Charles Sims says that people need to use their original creativity and not “spend all their time diddling around with footage that other people have made…” (Lessig 91). I kind of agree with Sims in that many people could create a lot more with their original thought and ideas but I also don’t discourage that type of creativity either. I believe it just opens up a new category of skill even though they didn’t make the original film or art. It doesn’t mean they can’t create something new and meaningful with the already made material. Some people aren’t skilled in making the piece of art or film but is very skilled with assembling the pieces with computer programs and such.

For this week I found the TED talk with Jane McGonigal very interesting. Jane claims that video games help us feel confident and solve problems, world problems. She says that people in general feel that we are not as good with real life as we are in real life. I agree with her that video games can help people feel better about themselves like how World of War craft allows you to be a leader and conquer with others around the world. But I had a very difficult time agreeing that by playing more video games will help us in turn do more in real life. The games she created as she discussed at the end of the talk I feel would help for example the game where you had to figure out what to do if we ran out of oil. This would engage your thinking with real life problems.

I have always seen video games as a good hobby and something to help your self-esteem but it can also over take your life. She even stated that regular video gamers spend up to 20 hours a week on games, a part time job! Many people do not learn to be comfortable with them because their online self is more “perfect” then their true selves. I think the characters created are unrealistic. So I think her theory only works with games that involve real life problems. I feel like she talked in circles a lot and did not simply state how video games will actually help people solve real world problems.

1. How do you define spirituality?

   I believe spirituality can have many different meanings and forms. I believe that the main definition is the spirituality is something that you connect to more than physically and mentally. It is something more than your body and soul. It can give you a sense of comfort, a sense of knowledge, or even a sense of intuition. It can help guide you where you need to be at that movement or in life.

2. Does spirituality differ from religion?

   I believe that there definitely is a spirit when it comes to religion it does the same thing as I described above but is more about the religion aspect of your life. Now I believe there to be other types of spirituality. There can be atheists who still feel the spirituality. It can be more than just religion. Like in this week’s reading. The author says “the goal of an artist is to reach a state of mind where art flows irresistibly through them, hence finding the art spirit. (79) It can be anything where you can just get this overpowered feeling that you just know what to do.

3. How do you define “creativity”?

   I define creativity as your ability to produce something new or unique that you originally thought in your head. And then taking action and using your skill to follow through with those thoughts or ideas. It doesn’t have to be artistic either and you don’t have to be a professional to be considered creative. It can involve your job, organizing something, or even coming up with a certain way of cleaning. I believe it is most recognized however in art like painting, ceramics, performance, etc.

4. What is the source of creativity?

   I think the true source of creativity is our mind and art spirituality if you will. I agree with Grey’s Creative Process on page 76 of “Art as Spirituality Practice”. There is formulation, Saturation, Incubation, Inspiration, Translation, and Integration. I think every step is taken when being creative but each person is different on how long they take on each step. Some people may not even notice that they do some of the steps. I believe a lot of creativity comes in “ah ha” moments where an idea just pops up in your head whether it be art ideas or something else. They key is to follow through with the ideas, then you are actually using your creativity to create!

This week’s reading on “Deeply Seeing” really intrigued me. I am going to school for art and it is a big part of my life. I have grown passionate for ceramics but also draw, paints, and use multimedia. I was interested in what the writer came up with for the creative process for an artist. I have always thought that every artist was unique in how they create their art but I now agree with the author. Formulation, saturation, incubation, inspiration, translation, and integration all come into play as an artist. It finally made sense when he wrote how every artist will spend different amount of time on each step, which brings it to the uniqueness that I was originally thinking about. (76)

He states that the goal of an artist is to reach a state of mind where art flows irresistibly through them. (79). I believe this to be so true. It gets very frustrating when you are not in the right mindset and your creative mind is not flowing well. The author nailed it with calling it “finding the art spirit” I don’t think it has to do with God or anything but it is spiritual in that you connect to something further than just you to create beauty and art.

I found out that my inspiration process is the kind where I just suddenly will get a full-blown image flash in my head, often while I am sleeping as opposed to getting snippets of ideas and finally seeing the rest once I start creating the art. I must sketch all the time to get all the details down before I forget.

I am currently taking my first yoga class this term and just heard about chakras and couple of weeks ago. I became interested learning the connection of the seven chakras to how we as artists reach spirituality through these chakras.

Article #1

Dickson, R. (November 01, 1998). Horror: To Gratify, Not Edify. Language Arts, 76, 2, 115-22. Retrieved November 6^th, 2013, from http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.uoregon.edu/stable/41484083?seq=2

This article was about the writer doing a personal investigation to why even children are attracted to horror, especially with books. The latest and most popular books for the children to read are the Goosebumps series. Randi read 3 of his daughters Goosebumps books, interviewed all of his daughter’s classmates about the books, and even looked to the author of the Goosebumps series to what he thought about children being intrigued by horror. Randi actually referenced back to our reading for this week, “Why Horror” by Caroll. He went over how monsters must be threatening. All the books had to have a monster that is unnatural with a main character that tries to figure out what this monster is, to prove that the monster exists. This intrigues the reader because they keep on reading to see if the main character is successful. When interviewing the children most of them simply said “I like to be scared”. He gets insight from Stine, the author of Goosebumps who believes that the children like to be scared from the books because it is a secure place to be scared. They can triumph over their fear in the safety of their bedroom or wherever they are reading the book.

One of the issues with this article and solving why people enjoy horror is that Randi could not get very intellectual answers. Many of the children did not understand themselves why they liked the books. Randi even concluded that many of the kids read the books simply because they were popular and everybody else was reading them. Randi does prove one issue brought up by Noel Carroll that many people might take pleasure in not only the monster but also the narrative structure in which the monster is present. (Carroll 278) Randi proves this in that the children like that they have to keep on reading to see what happens next. They like to see the character figure out whom the monster is, to prove that the monster exists, and to hopefully then destroy the monster. The other thing that Carroll states is that “The horror story is driven explicitly by becoming curious. The horror story engages the audience by having the process of discovery, proof, explanation, hypothesis, and confirmation (279). Randi discovered that many of the children followed the story and followed all of Carroll’s points. They put themselves into the characters shoes.

Article #2

Gaut, B. (October 01, 1993). The paradox of horror. British Journal of Aesthetics, 33, 4.), Retrieved November 6^th, 2013, from http://go.galegroup.com.libproxy.uoregon.edu/ps/retrieve.do?sgHitCountType=None&sort=RELEVANCE&inPS=true&prodId=AONE&userGroupName=s8492775&tabID=T002&searchId=R1&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&contentSegment=&searchType=AdvancedSearchForm&currentPosition=1&contentSet=GALE%7CA14633203&&docId=GALE|A14633203&docType=GALE&role=

Gaut in this article was here to prove that it is not unusual that people enjoy horror. In “Why Horror” he asks how can we be attracted to something that disgusts us or repulses us? (275). Gaut goes over various reasons and possibilities of why we could enjoy horror. One of these possibilities is that the fear may just be muted due to the fact that the viewer knows that it is not real life. Gaut surprisingly shuts down one of Carroll’s reasons on how there is always a monster that is out of the ordinary. Gaut proves this wrong by talking about what is now known as “slashers”. They are not created monsters but are actually derived as psychopathic serial killers. Some people even view these because they just want to overcome their fear. Gaut explains that this could be one reason but it is not the main reason. Many people just like to go and enjoy being scared. The best example he presented was how humans naturally are attracted to danger. People can be attracted to mountain climbing, roller coasters, skydiving, and motor racing.  You can be scared doing these things but they are also fun and enjoyable at the same time. It is controlled fear though. You know you are going to be scared. Gaut finalizes by emphasizing that we may be scared but it is a positive emotion of fear rather than a negative emotion of fear. It is not a paradox of horror because it is not the same type of fear.

Gaut covers many issues brought up in our reading simply because he covers so many different scenarios that people have come up with of why people enjoy horror and has constructed their reason down to why they do not work. For example he proves Carroll wrong with the monster situation. Carroll believes that there must be a monster involved in a horror, that it is essential to have a monster because the viewer/reader need to see if the monster exists or not. Gaut proves this is wrong introducing the slasher horror movies mentioned above. He also proves Carroll wrong in the mention that “The disclosure of the existence of the horrific being and of its properties is the central source of pleasure in the genre” (282). This is not always the case. There are actually quite a few horror movies or books that do not get solved in the end or the monster/ killer does not get defeated leaving you still scared. This is not the reason for the please of the viewer/reader. Gaut says after watching scary movies we are often scared walking to our car or have a hard time getting to sleep because of the scary movie but this doesn’t stop us in watching the movie.

1.    Take some time to reflect on how you dress and customize yourself. Consider and respond to the following questions:

a.    Are there any personal beliefs or values that are supported and expressed by your dress or body adornment?
b.    Why do you make the choices you do?
c.     How has this changed over the years?

The way I dress has a lot of variety. I am not one to go shopping a lot. I buy an article of clothing here and there about once every few months. So I like to make my clothes last. I wear a lot of jeans and tops, ranging from t-shirts, long sleeves, to nicer blouses and knit type shirts. I get cold very easily so I tend to wear many hoodies, sweaters, and jackets. I have a few shoes; black work shoes, white Nike shoes, a pair of black and white KED knock offs, a pair of Romeos, a pair of heels (that I never wear!), and a few old navy dollar flip-flops. I’d like to say my style has a lot to do with being comfortable but not sloppy. I am most comfortable in jeans rather than skirts or dresses although I do have a few I just don’t wear them as often. (a lot because of the whole cold situation). My tops can be fitting or a little loose but not constricting my body just because it is “fashionable”. Beliefs and values I have that my clothes reflect is comfort, modesty, and financially sensible.  I am comfortable with the way my body is but I don’t feel that is necessary to show off your stomach or flaunt your boobs which is why I like to be more modest and cover those up! I also value being financially sensible. My thought is that if the clothing I have is still perfectly fine the way it is then why not still wear it? I see many people buy clothes all the time and I feel that it is a waste of money to always but more and more clothes.

I make my choices of clothes because of my values and beliefs. I’m open to new things to wear. Sometimes I will see an article of clothing at the store that I normally wouldn’t wear and still fall in love with it. I just go with my intuition on if I like it or not. I do not keep up to date with the latest trends and do not care if I have that latest “Gucci” bag. My style and choices have changed through out the years for the better. When I was younger I was insecure about myself and did not like to stand out a lot. For example with colors, I used to wear a lot of darker colors because I thought it would be more flattering on my body. I have now become more comfortable with who I am and have branched out to more colors. I love to wear turquoise, bright red, white, blues, plaids, etc. they help express your emotion and can put you in a better mood. I feel that my mood can rub off on other people too. If you see somebody in dark clothes you may get a different vibe than from somebody in bright colors.

2.    What were the core beliefs and values in your family and how were they communicated/sustained through dress or body customization?

I was raised in a Mormon household and so a huge value that my parents held was to be modest. This meant to not show off your body. You couldn’t wear tank tops. Your shirts had to have sleeves and short had to be to your knees. Other adornment like tattooing and piercings were out of the question. I am no longer following that belief system although I do value modesty just not as extremely. I am more about not flaunting body pieces like they’re objects. I also have a tattoo, a dream catcher on my back. I find it expressive to who I am. Dream catchers were made to keep the good dreams and let the bad dreams escape. I believe people should keep their dreams and strive to reach them. This is another one of my beliefs that is expressed through adornment, tattoos.

3.    What are the core beliefs and values of your peer community? How are they expressed through dress and body adornment?

My peer community is full of different types of people that have very different beliefs and values. You have got some people that value family and who dress accordingly with appropriate clothes. You have teenage girls who don’t value modest, and dress quite revealing, maybe valuing on getting a guy? There are skaters who value skating and dress with all “skater” attire. There are people who value their jobs that dress professionally whatever associates with their job. Then there are others like me who wear what is comfortable and speaks out to them about whether they like it or not.

The fact after writing this and after doing the watching people assignment this week is that there are so many different values that different people can believe in and it can be reflected on from what they where. And the judgments we make could be totally skewed from the person’s reason for wearing what they do or it could be dead on. You can never know unless you ask a person. And I believe that not everybody knows what their clothes can represent either. I never even thought about what my clothes had to say about my values until this weeks lecture.

The first lady that I saw was wearing a green crew neck long sleeve sweater. She was wearing pretty big gold hoop earrings. Her hair was a short bob cut that was curled. She had quite a bit of make up on as well. Blush, drawn on eyebrows, and pink lipstick. She wore blue jeans and some black shoes with a slight heel. She also had on a gold bracelet. She had a tan purse with a long strap. Based on what this woman wore and the accessories with her I would say that one value of hers could be to be modest. He did not have anything that was revealing like a low cut blouse. I feel that she cares about her looks and wants to look good not only for herself but for others as well. I think this is because of her jewelry and her makeup. I have an assumption that she wants to look younger than her true age especially with the drawn on eyebrows. I believe she may not feel comfortable with how her natural eyebrows are. She looks like she has a well-put together life. She had on a wedding band, which shows that she is married. I would assume she might have a family since she is older. The assumptions that I have of this woman could say that my values and beliefs are that people use makeup to beautify themselves or look younger. I also have a belief that many people who marry often will start a family and have children.

The second person I saw was a gentleman that wore blue jeans with a straight leg. A bright orange t-shirt, crew neck style. He wore a black baseball style hat with sunglasses on top of the bill of the hat. His hair was short and closely cut with a clean trim line. He wore really worn Nike tennis shoes. His clothes were not clean. They had dirt or some type of grease stains on them. On the back pocket of his jeans you could see a circle permanently on the material. His face and hands were also dirty. He had facial hair, a goatee, which was neatly trimmed. Based on this mans dress and body adornment. I assume that this man cares about his looks in how his hair was neatly trimmed. I also believe he is a hard worker based on how dirty his skin and clothes were. I think normally he would be kept clean but I assumed he had just gotten off work. He had a ring on his finer which showed hat he is married (also he was with a woman and child presumably his wife and son.) I would think the gender he considers himself would be male based on the stereotypical “male characteristics” The circle on his back pocket is from a chew can which shows that his health is not the highest on his list of values and beliefs. I made the assumption that he is a dedicated father and husband and provides for them. These assumptions show that I value family and dedication.

The third person I saw was this girl. She wore really expensive looking jeans like Silvers or Miss Me’s. She had on some black toms shoes.. She wore a Cabela’s camouflage hoodie along with a black north face jacket. Her hair was platinum blonde and was crimped. The bottom layer of hair was dyed with very dark brown or black. Her skin was very tan, like fake tan to where her skin had a tint of orange to it. She had on a lot of makeup. You could see she put a lot of concealer on, mascara, eyeliner, and eye shadow, as well as lip-gloss. She had on a few silver rings on each hand. She had acrylic nails too. Her purse she was carrying was couch. From the things I saw with this woman my assumption is that she values fashion and beauty extremely. I think that she follows with the latest trends and strives to be what today’s society’s definition of beauty is like in magazines and television. I believe she comes from an upper middle class or high class financially. Every piece of clothing or accessory I saw was very expensive. I believe she may emotionally not feel naturally pretty and must cover up with “fake beauty”. I think she expresses her gender as female based on the stereotypical characteristics that are feminine. She looks healthy but may be headed to a path of bad health with all of the fake tanning. She looked very young. The assumptions that I have of this girl show my value of naturally beauty. I don’t think you have to cover up your natural features so drastically. A little bit of makeup to emphasize your features I think is nice but not necessary.

Article I chose:

Kuehn, G. (June 01, 2012). Tasting the world: Environmental aesthetics and food as art. Contemporary Pragmatism, 9, 1, 85-98.

In this article Glenn Kuehn connects vies from three different important figures in history in order to prove that food is capable of being art. Marie Antoine Careme is the first. He was a very important chef and believes the “pastry”, a part of food is the epitome of one of the fine arts. (Kuehn 87) He expressed how combining the elements together and laying it out is much like architecture which is a category of fine arts. Langer is another person who did not believe food could be art but that architecture was. Dewey had an environmental approach to art. He states “food offers us a unique awareness and appreciation of those qualitative aspects within experience. (Kuehn 90) The experience you have is what art is all about. I believe Kuehn really summarizes it in page 91. He claims “art does something to us because we are involved with it through our bodily selves”.

An issue brought up in Glenn’s article was that it can be difficult for people to see how food can be art because it is consumed and then it is gone. But I must be consumed in order to be experienced. This question is also brought up in Telfer’s riting. She asks how can it be art when we just destroy it when we eat it? We must eat it in order to judge it. Telfer states that a work of art must be intended for aesthetic consideration. Glenn explains how you must be open to how you get the aesthetic part to the food. To get the food’s aesthetic worth it must be eaten and with that it is categorized in the theory of art where it can be temporary, a process, and is the qualitative experience.

Another issue that isn’t even brought up in Glenn’s article which is if food is art, does that cover all food? In this weeks material we watched two videos: one being slow food and the other, fast food. I think it is safe to say that fast food is not art. It is made to make money and not to be aesthetically pleasing. Glenn does not specify through his whole piece on what type of food is art. I believe however that he was focusing only about slow food since the people he compared through out the article were chefs.