Month: April 2014

Person 1:  The first person I saw was a young lady maybe 23 years old.  She was short and a little curvy. She had short red hair that was styled messy curly.  This look makes me think she is a little sassy. I believe she was a college student because I saw her studying what looked to be medical related.  She was wearing a Dutch Bros jacket with a loose grey shirt underneath and faded jean capris with converse.  Based on her appearance I think she is probably a laid back, more casual person, easy going with a little bit of edge.  I also think she might work at Dutch Bros based on her sweatshirt.  I believe this young lady has a strong work ethic with goals and determination. To be working and going to school is enough of an accomplishment, but the medicine related study is an even loftier goal.   I feel she values this part of herself and probably grew up with strong values and a supportive family.

Person 2: The second person I am writing about was another young lady; I would think a freshman in college.  She was tall and slender with long blonde straightened hair.  She wasn’t wearing a lot of make up, but her nails were done.  She was wearing flashy Nike leggings, Nike frees and a sorority sweatshirt. By her height and slender not skinny build, I would think she was an athlete.  Her sorority sweatshirt leads me to believe she is involved in one and also she’s a student.  I feel she values friendship and community because that is a big part of the sorority lifestyle. The way she was carrying herself makes me think she is light hearted and spirited. I also feel that while she cleans up nicely with her straight blonde hair and French tip nails, she isn’t over the top because she barely wore make up. Also, not only was her height and build present, but also her Nike attire makes me believe she was concerned about her fitness.  French nails, Nike clothes and sororities are no cheap things, so I believe she comes from a wealthy background.

Person 3: The last person I observed was a middle aged Caucasian man.  He might have been in his late 30’s or early 40’s.  He had brown hair and a small 5 o’clock shadow.  He was walking alone with a saddle bag/briefcase around his shoulder.  Since I was on a school campus, I believe he may have been a professor or a businessperson.  Somewhat conflicting, he was wearing relaxed jeans, a button up flannel shirt and hiking style boots or tennis shoes.  I feel his appearance makes him look very relaxed and laid back, friendly.  I think with the weird combination of style that he might be a bachelor or have a lady of the same relaxed nature.  The hiking shoes make me think he has an outdoorsy nature and enjoys nature. If he does enjoying hiking, then I also think he would value fitness or health. The briefcase/side bag makes me believe he is educated, or possibly in the process of achieving an education.

Overall, all of these assumptions are based on a few second glances at a person.  These are all quick to judge comments based off of appearance.  While I believe that the way people present themselves can say a lot of about their culture, character and values, it is not always the case.  Considering I wear a lot of athletic gear doesn’t necessarily mean I work out as much as it appears. My comments above are very superficial.  I don’t go too deep into who a person is or where they come from because I cannot form that opinion based on a few quick looks at a person.

Art can be defined as many different things.  But would food fit into any of those definitions? Fabio Parasecoli presents his interesting opinions on the subject in his article, “ Is Food Art?”. Parasecoli is neither the first nor the only to debate or address the concept as he highlights that as food becomes more prominent so does it place as a topic of scholarly conversation.  The author presents the two aspects that could connect food and art together.  He first illustrates that innovation and creativity are attributes that chefs bring to the world of art, and second, is that these chefs within the media are described as “avant-garde”.  Within the article, Parasecoli describes the further risk and reward to this new art form, food.  To help further the career or new artist, in this case chefs, they rely on donors and more importantly investors.

Rather than painting on a canvas or sculpting a structure, a chef creates art via food instead.  To be a successful food artist, you need originality and innovation, something that hasn’t been done before.  A chef goes beyond a simple cook by handcrafting exquisite dishes to fulfill the haute cuisine régime. These high-class chefs are “expected to offer patrons (and critics) dishes and menus that stimulate and surprise”. To remain within the public eye, they must keep innovating new recipes, experimenting successfully with new flavors and organizing new designs.  By creating new cutting edge dishes, not following others, they become a true artist.  The dedication and work it took to become a chef of this caliber should be appreciated. Just as other sorts of artists, a chef sets out to appeal to his audiences’ aesthetic reaction, particularly smell and taste.  To consider whether or not these haute cuisine chefs create distinguished works of art, Telfer defines a work of art as “a thing intended or used wholly or largely for aesthetic consideration” (Telfer, 14).  This higher-class food, cuisine rather, is meant to be appreciated and thought about before eaten.  This classifies this type of food a work of art, but not all food.  Not all food is meant to be savored in this way.  Comparing Telfer’s idea to Parasecoli’s, it seems they both agree that food can be art, and chefs are indeed artists.  One caveat that Telfer explains goes further than Parasecolis classifications of artist, “ art is original creation, whereas craft is carrying out an instruction” (Telfer, 15). Extra clarification, a chef who creates his own new and innovative meal is indeed an artist not just a craftsman.

Parasecolis second approach to food as art is in regards to the term avant-garde. “An intelligentsia that develops new or experimental concepts esp. in the arts” can explain the term avant-garde. By this definition, a chef who is an artist by description above is also an avant-garde in the media.  Food as an art is a relatively new and controversial topic. Although Telfer agrees that food can be art, she struggles with dishes of food being works of art. Perhaps in this aspect, Parasecoli and Telfer disagree.  “How can there be works of art which are destroyed by the very activity, eating, which is necessary for contemplating them?” (Telfer, 17).  Parasecoli can defend and say the chefs are appealing to the aesthetic appeal of their people and are embarking on a new journey, to make food a work of art.  This is an experimental concept as of yet.  According to Parasecoli, chefs actually make it a point to tell the world their intention is to become an artist, to be avant-garde.  They post to websites, interviews, and write there own story via cookbooks to compare to previous declarations of avant-garde.  The idea of haute cuisine is comparable to previous movements of the past that are already “ historically affirmed”.

In conclusion, Parasecoli explains bluntly that “young gifted chefs are often not too worried whether “narrow-minded customers” appreciate their work.”  In other words, they know what they are setting out to do and don’t necessarily care if every person accepts their journey.  Perhaps the only people they do care about, are the investors who help fund their dream. You can say this about any type of new artist, actor, vocalist etc. It is a risk to create new art forms, but Telfer and Parasecoli are both believers in the concept of food as art.  Parasecoli’s article to exclaim food is an art form, takes an approach more towards the innovation and creativity behind it to define the artist whereas Telfer approaches it is as the finished product can be the art form. Regardless, these two authors agree generally that yes, food is potentially art.

Parasecoli, F. (2013, August 29). Is Food Art? Chefs, Creativity, and the Restaurant Business? Huffington Post. Retrieved April 26, 2014 from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/fabio-parasecoli/food-art_b_3830791.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.

Elizabeth Telfer’s addresses the seemingly controversial topic about whether or not food is or can be an art form.  In our discussions about art so far, it has never crossed my mind that food would be a topic tied to art.  It is an interesting and intriguing concept and I certainly think it should be considered.  The issue about dishes as works of art that the author brings up grabbed my attention most.  She presented the idea with the complex issue “because people have to eat them to appreciate them” (Telfer, 17).  I can’t say that I agree with this statement.  In my opinion the aesthetics of art comes from viewing or hearing it.  Food can be an art from purely based on its arrangement on the plate, the use of color, the display and so on, not because of the taste. However, according to the definition of aesthetics in this article, “ our reaction is aesthetic, in many simple cases, if it is based solely on how the object appears to the sense”, all of them, including taste (Telfer, 9).  Retracting my previous thoughts, taste appeals to one of the sense, therefore can be a means for evaluating art.  Just like any of the other senses, the interpretation is individualized and particular to each person. Perhaps the big issue of food as art, is if taste is the concern, then in order for more than one person so enjoy the same work of art, they would have to eat different portions of the dish, and “no two people can appreciate the same one” (Telfer, 17). After the dish is eaten and/or shared, then it can be difficult for the chef or creator to recreate the exact same dish for someone else to possibly enjoy the exact same experience.

From Ellen Dissanayake’s lecture, my take on food as art is from the modernist theory. I believe it is most related based on how she defines aesthetics “ a concern with elucidating principles such as taste and beauty that govern all arts” (Dissanayake, 17). With all of the cooking shows, specifically dessert shows, on television now I think it is safe to say that people do find food as an art form.  Popular broadcasts are “Cake Boss” and “Cupcake Wars” which both involve amazingly cool dessert structures, which absolutely appeal to me aesthetically.

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

Telfer, 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.

1. The word paleoanthropsychobiological was coined by Ellen Dissanayake in her lecture “ Art for Life’s Sake”. Broken down the word can be explained as the study of human history, society and emotion as it relates to art.  Dissanayake argues that the idea of art is a complicated mix of all of the above.

2. Dissanayake explains the phrase “making special” as giving something an extraordinary meaning. It could be an act with strong significance, or an object that one cares deeply about. As humans have evolved over time, so have the ‘special’ things. This concept dates back 250,000 years ago when people would color things in red to make them stand out, make them special. The author suggests that when ancestors used to hunt, all the activities and prior preparation tasks were made special so that the hunting would be successful (Dissanayake, 23). Included in preparations, were ritual ceremonies.  These are most often recognized as an art form, and crucial for success, therefore made special.  These ceremonies were used for various things such as conflict resolution, adverting evil and curing illness, all things necessary for survival.

3. In her lecture, Dissanayake identifies many different theories of art throughout western European history.  The first one mentioned was the development of ‘fine art’ and modernity in the eighteenth century. The main ideology surrounding fine art is the “’aesthetics’- a concern with elucidating principles such as taste and beauty” (Dissanayake, 17). There was this new approach to art, that “art had no purpose but to “be” and provide opportunities for enjoying an aesthetic experience” (Dissanayake, 18). Following this period, since art had become free ranged, it became difficult for viewers to critique and understand.  So in the early twentieth century, Clive Bell and Roger Fry developed a new ‘formalist’ approach that art had to be articulated by those only by those who “had leisure and education enough” to appreciate it (Dissanayake,18). Later in that century, Clement Greenberg and Harold Rosenberg further enlightened this thought by realizing “values were not easily apparent to the untutored observer, appreciating art became more than ever an elite activity” (Dissanayake,18). By removing the invisible boundaries and giving artists more freedom, it became more difficult for viewers to interpret and understand. Following came postmodernism- Art as Interpretation in the later part of the twentieth century.  This seemed to be somewhat of a rebellion phase of art, that artists didn’t want their work to be just one thing, but anything. This time questioned all previous traditions about art. The artists during this time believed that art could be interpreted based on each individual, regardless of what the artist actually intended, there is no right or wrong.  “Artists, just like everybody else, do not see the world in any singularly privileged or objective truthful way, but rather- like everybody- interpret it according to their own individual and cultural sensibilities” (Dissanayake, 19).

Referenced Text: 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.

I first watched this week’s video about beauty, a Ted Talks presentation by Denis Dutton.  What is beauty and where did the idea come from?  I agree with the first and most widely know definition, “ Beauty is in the eye of the beholder”.  In my head, somewhat like our discussion on values, it is personal and different for everyone.  Some see beauty in things others do not.  There was a theory around minute 2:20 that beauty is more precisely in the “culturally conditioned eye of the beholder”.  Theorist think that your taste of beauty is developed culturally, by what your culture has determined is beautiful.  But later on that theory is disproved and I believe it was wrong.  Maybe not way back when, but now, people can find beauty in thousand of things unrelated to their own culture. Dutton explains the painting, picture or landscape that is found universally pleasurable.  That is not cultural; people of all cultures find it to be beautiful and find enjoyment by looking at it, or visiting it.

Personally, I am not into art much. Let me revise that and say I’m not into art in the typical sense of the word, paintings or sculptures (that’s what I typically think ‘art’ is). I am into music and dancing to some extent, which can also be art.  I think my issue with painting is that I have no interest or experience in painting therefor it is hard for me to appreciate the work. Ellen Dissanayake does a great job of outlining the history of art, its timeline of interpretation and understanding and how to approach art. “’Disinterest’ implied that viewers could appreciate any art, even the artwork of eras or cultures far removed from their own, whether or not they understood the meaning the works had for the people who made and used them” (Dissanayake, 18).  Perhaps the reason I don’t find interest in this form of art is because I don’t always see the meanings, reason or purpose or I struggle with aesthetics.  I’m a logical minded person and I find difficulty in wrapping my head around it. Apparently I don’t have the ‘disinterested mine’ the author refers to to appreciate fine art.  Sure I can appreciate that is someone’s work and they put time and effort into it.  But that is not my definition of beauty; I find beauty in other art forms.  In the early 20^th century, Bell and Fry decided that “ art had become, if not a religion, an ideology whose principles were articulated by and for the few who had leisure and education enough to acquire them” (Dissanayake, 18).  Fine art can be seen in museums or galleries, which take time and often money to go see. These leisurely activities are not appealing to all.  Education is more of my concern.  Fine art is not educated well in my school system and I never sought out any understanding of it, so perhaps that is why it doesn’t appeal to me.

 

Referenced Text: 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.

Youtube-Denis Dutton: A Darwinian theory of beauty

My Ordered List:

Family–Security–Loyalty –Friendship–Integrity

Enjoyment–Health–Personal Development– Personal Accomplishment–Location–Prestige–Wealth–Independence–Leadership–Wisdom–Expertness–Community–Service–Creativity–Power

Since it is currently Saturday afternoon, I haven’t done a lot yet today.  Doing this assignment however, counts toward personal accomplishment, and independence. I have the freedom to do this assignment whenever and wherever I chose and do it on time.  I haven’t had the opportunity today to demonstrate my top 5 life values, but that doesn’t mean I don’t on other days.  I live apart from my family while I am here at school, but I keep regular contact with them. In fact more than likely I will speak to family today!  It is very important to me to have close family and eventually a family of my own.  Considering family is my number one, I believe I inherited a lot of patterns from them.  Growing up surrounded by loving parents and family encourages me to act the same and pass along the love to my own. Besides family, friendship is greatly important.  Sharing life experiences with people close to me is something I cherish.  Good friendship is loyal, secure and enjoyable. I am loyal, honest and trustworthy towards those I care about (well I always try to be honest and trustworthy).  My best friend and I have been best friends for close to 21 years now- that’s loyalty.

A lot of the things on my list pertain to my life when I ‘grow up’.  First and foremost I want to get set in my career.  Have the security to be able to support and provide for my family and myself.  That will be huge personal development and accomplishment as well as show independence.  Location is midway on my list as well because it s important to me to live and work close to home now.  Wealth isn’t extremely important; it’s more of an added bonus.  I’d love to have nice things and be able to vacation and not live paycheck to paycheck.  But things like enjoyment and location are much more important.  I’d rather love what I’m doing and live comfortably than hate it and be rich.  All of these things will come in time.  I have to first finish my Bachelor’s Degree then finish all of my certification courses before starting my career.

 

The topic of discussion this week is “ A Question of Values”.  How did they come about? What do they mean?  From the opening section, the point I grasped about values with complexity and quarrelsomeness comes down to individuality.  I think depending on how you were raised, what religion you practice, where you went to school among other things greatly influences our beliefs and values. In my opinion genetic instincts have very little to do with values and beliefs. The quote “perhaps we are not driven by immutable instincts…alternatively, by peer pressure, by the relentless demands of the society in which we happen to live” makes great sense to me (pg 8, Lewis).  It applies to my opinion about how values come about.

If I were to define values, it would simply be ideas or thoughts with great importance to a person.  Ideas and thoughts are subjective to that person and therefore not everyone shares the same.  I think values reflect what someone thinks or knows is good in the world, or right.  Whether it is trust, honesty or loyalty etc.  Some people may value a lot of the same things but carry them out differently, or their IDEA of that value is different.  It is a very blurry subject and I can see the complexity.  The fact of knowing something arises an entirely different dilemma. The four basic ways of how ‘knowing’ comes about mentioned in the article seem reasonable to me.  I began to think about the things I claim to know and why I think I know it.  Logic mostly, I am a logical minded person. Secondly, emotion.  If something I or someone else has done that made me angry, or sad then that to me is wrong and cruel.  Therefore I form a value based on how I think and feel.  I value other people’s feelings; it is of importance to me.

I believe I have good morals.  My behaviors reflect “the ‘good”, the ‘just’ and the ‘beautiful’” things I believe (pg 7, Lewis). I act the way I do because of they way I was raised, the lessons I learned, the experiences and feelings I went through. They all taught me the good, the just and the beautiful.  A combination of the above gave me my values.

 

Text: Lewis, H. (1990). A Question of Values: Six Ways We Make the Personal Choices That Shape Our Lives. Axios Press.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/11/complementary-medicine-autism_n_4577129.html

I read this blog post about complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) treatments for young children with autism.  I thought it was fairly interesting.  There was some good and some bad coming out of the studies.  Most importantly I think that CAM is a good addition to traditional treatment, which is what happened in this study.  Things such as acupuncture and dietary supplements were used as CAM treatments.  But also injections and other potentially harmful ways of treatment.  These kids in this study are so young and its scary to think about special diets and invasive procedures at such a young age.  I would be cautious as a parent as to what treatments were best for my child.