Art, Games, and Tech Discussion

After watching, Gaming can make a better world: Jane McGonigal on TED.com, I am convinced that people can develop better develop ideas on how to save the world by playing online games and becoming “gamers”. Jane talks about how gamers are virtuoso at four things in the gaming world, which could be crucial to make this world a better place if people apply them to real world life instead of the virtual world. She states that because gamers spend so much time, “over 5 million people spend an hour a day,” playing games, they are experts at “urgent optimism, social fabric, blissful productivity and epic meaning.” These four things are associated in the gaming world because people who play games create a positive outlook on the competition between each other. They develop a quick thinking process because they are indeed practicing hard work. Jane states that, “humans are happiest when working hard; not sitting around and doing nothing. Gamers are movers!” My question is, do you believe that gaming and the mindset that it develops, could become a positive technique in order to help create a better world?

Creative Spirtituality Reflection

1. How do you define “spirituality”?

My definition of spirituality is based off of my Christian faith. Christianity holds a working definition of spirituality, “the life-long journey through which a person comes to discover Self in relationship to God and to God’s creation.” More generally speaking, spirituality involves humankind’s ultimate nature towards matters of sanity and of psychological health.

2. Does spirituality differ from religion?

Yes, religion is more of a set of values, teachings and actions that inspire a divine belief, which leads to pathway for a diety’s presence to be seen and felt more directly. Whereas, spirituality is a more of general term, which involves religion but that also encompasses the general human desire to strives towards the greater whole of them selves. The most basic difference between religion and spirituality is that religions offer a specific structure to help people to realize their innate spirituality.

3. How do you define “creativity”?

I define creativity as a person’s ability to think outside of the box. How far that ability reaches outside of the box will result in innovative creations or approaches to certain tasks. Creativity can play a role and be crucial for certain jobs.Everyone has a certain level of creativity, however, those that see are and understand their emotions while viewing the world of art may be more creative.

4. What is the source of creativity?

Creativity can be derived from stepping out of your comfort zone. For example, if someone is used to always making or listening to music, it can be the step-to-step aside and try something different, such as sports. Creativity does not only pertain to art. It is a mindset of living, and how we decide to experience life in different aspects of our innate nature. It is the source of our thoughts and how we brain storm our ideas into actions.

Unit 7-Creative Spirituality-“Looking vs. Seeing”

I found Grey’s article, The Mission of Art, most eye opening. He focuses on how looking and seeing differ. ‘Looking’ is turning one’s eyes to a certain object while ‘seeing’ is the perception of an object or how a person determines what he is looking at. This idea also applies in a second way because, ‘looking’ can also refer to appearance while ‘seeing’ can be defined as an act or physical activity. We look at things and evaluate them in our minds every day. We often tend to overlook the depth or meaning of the word or actions s we use and say, which makes it quite easy to blend the two as one meaning. This is especially true with terms that have similar meanings like ‘looking’ and ‘seeing.’ Both involve using the eyes and sense of sight, but upon closer examination it will reveal what makes one different from the other. Seeing is the effect of looking. For instance, if you want to see something you must look at it first. It differs from the explanation of “to see” as we see something only when it comes into our sight by chance. Looking can be seeing, but seeing is also about knowing. Grey helps to describe the three eyes of knowing in which we can truly see people, objects and places: “Saint Bonaventure’s three eyes of knowing: the eye of flesh sees the “outer” realm of material objects; the eye of reason sees symbolically, drawing distinctions and making conceptual relationships; and the mystic eye of contemplation sees the luminous transcendental realms” (The Mission of Art, 74). I agree that it is important for artist to be able to see on each level in order understand the “technical beauty, archetypal beauty, and spiritual beauty” and use the three different understandings in their work. (The Mission of Art, 74). These three types of beauty captures a sophisticated piece of art. Therefore, items that we may look at on the daily are not sophisticated enough to capture our attention until emotions are involved with our looking, then we are truly seeing when thought interferes.

 

Enjoying Horror Research

The first article that I read by Tibi Puiu, “Why Do People Love Horror Movies?” it answers this question by stating that people do not actually enjoy the emotional experience of fright, but they enjoy the emotional relief after the adrenaline rush of a scary moment. According to “This phenomenon is commonly referred to as ‘excitation transfer’, and despite this kind of arousal is far from being pleasant, when the extreme sense of excitement wears off, it is replaced by an equally intense sense of relief” (Puiu). At an emotional level, being chased by a face-altered, crazy clown in real life is fairly comparable to seeing and experiencing images of such a chase at a distance from the comfort of a chair, watching a movie. The reading assignment, “Why Horror?” states that, “it is not the tragic event itself that imparts pleasure, but rather, the way it is worked into the plot” (Carroll, 277). There are many theories argued as to why other reasons would strike a persons attention to see a horror movie; one reason being a coping mechanism for their own conflict with fear or violence.

The second article I discovered is based on materials provided by University of Chicago Press Journals, “They Enjoy Being Scared”. The main argument was that typically, people’s motivation to pursue pleasure and avoid pain, and it certainly seems counterintuitive that so many people would voluntarily view two hours of terror, fear and disgust. How can this be proven with many decisions to engage in experiences known to contract horrible feelings, such as horror movies? It almost seems that, “horror movie viewers are happy to be unhappy” (They Enjoy Being Scared). People experience both negative and positive emotions simultaneously — people may actually enjoy being scared, not just relief when the threat is removed.  “The Horror story is driven explicitly by curiosity. It engages its audience by being involved in the process of disclosure, discovery, proof, explanation, hypothesis, and confirmation” (Carroll, 279). The article responds to the question, “Why do people love horror movies?” by evaluating that the viewer is not actually afraid, but excited by the adrenaline caused by the movie.

Personally, I am not a fan of the horror genre. While I have felt the rush or being frightened by a film, I feel like some can almost be too realistic. Both articles discuss the thrill that people love to feel while seeking the next terrorizing moment in a horror movie. The younger generations tend to enjoy the thrill more because young adults seek the excitement in life, and horror seems to display the unknown and scenarios that could seem realistic.

 
Puiu, Tibi. (October 29, 2012). “Why Do People Love Horror Movies?” ZMEscience.com. ZME Media. Retrieved February 16, 2014 from http://www.zmescience.com/research/studies/why-people-watch-horror-movies-4032432/#eCvOQIrQBTIZLHsg.99

University of Chicago Press Journals. (2007, July 31). “Why Do People Love Horror Movies? They Enjoy Being Scared.” ScienceDaily. Retrieved February 16, 2014 from www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/07/070725152040.htm

Personal Adornment Essay

Similar to Unit 2, “Understanding Values”, how I express my body language, specific apparel choice, and public representation is based off of my lifestyle. All of these aspects have been determined by core beliefs and values in my family and or peer community.

On average, I dress casually every day on campus. This is where I would most likely be seen in public, because I arrive to attend classes from late morning to early afternoon right after practice has concluded. If one were to make assumptions about me based off of quick observations then I would appear to be in a frantic state. Generally, it may look like I would have just thrown on some athletic clothes just after a quick shower. My concerns do not have much investment in appearance during school hours. After school hours aren’t much better. A long day dragging around my stuffed-to-the-limit backpack takes a toll on whatever energy I have left, and I will typically end the day even more casually before starting homework, dinner, or anything on my to-do-list in order to wind down from the day. I understand that my dress may not completely reflect my values in hard work and effort. However, I am consistent about making conscious efforts in dressing modestly. I believe that is a very important quality in which women to should portray. Perhaps my values in modesty are derived from my Christian background and upbringing. It is something that I have drilled into the back of my head, and it is unlikely that I will change this value because I want to promote a sense of self-respect for myself in front of others. My Mother and Father have repetitively said to me, “you never know who is watching”. Modesty is not only a part of my dress, but my character. I do my best to carry myself in a modest manner.

Obviously, my efforts in dress may vary. Based on certain events, I attempt to dress appropriate to the specific occasion. I am aware that I don’t always dress to the nines however, in the past I used to make more effort in presenting myself in a clean-cut manner and put more emphasis on my surface appearance. If someone were to observe and evaluate for an elongated period of time they would observe that my days are routine with an organized hour-to-hour schedule. The town that I grew up in was a community that consisted of people who, for a lack of a better term, are rather “uppity”. This is a judgment that has been developed not only by me after many years of residing in the same community, but by any visitors with whom I have spoken about the town. The persona developed main concern based off of materialistic and surface values. I was lucky enough to grow up in a home with parents who modeled to me that it is important to get to know a person for who they truly are instead of creating friendships because of similar styles or levels of wealth. It was not a common virtue for people to truly want to get to know each other’s character. The common focus tended to be on self and thoughts of “look at me” is the best way to describe the general lifestyle of people with whom I faced daily. The point that I am attempting to make by describing this part of my upbringing is to portray that I am quite conscious about my appearance. From my parents I learned that if you want resect, you must treat others with respect first. On the other hand, my community taught me that if you gain respect based on the surface and first appearance impressions. Yes, appearance impressions, not solely first impressions when there is a conversation is involved. These are mixed messages that have developed my value system and now I apply both to how I think, and what others may potentially think about me.

Though for a time I succumbed to the ideals of those around me I have since then come to see the light of what really is important to me; the respect of those around me. However, at times this is difficult for me because of my generally shy demeanor. The body language I exude can be mistaken as “up-tight” making it harder to gain the respect of my peers and coaches. Basically, the persona that I would like to portray is not how I come across. My values and character is still a work in progress.

Personal Adornment Presentation

I’ve decided while watching TV in my living room, to watch my three roommates. Of course I see them everyday, and know a lot about them, but it hasn’t occurred to me that if I did not know that, what would I think about them based on their dress and body language? All of us, lounging around after a long day, are comfortable wearing pajamas or sweats that we may not wear in public. This gave me a chance to fully observe their character. Because we are all comforted with each other’s presence, their body language is relaxed and so is their dress. However, one has a midterm this week and I can see she is not focused on the show, and is debating the importance of her studying. This specific roommate is more often at the library, and dresses quite conservatively every day, instead of the rest of us who normally wear sweatshirts because our priorities after an early morning consist of thinking when we can find the next window of time in our day to sleep. Therefore, the one roommate who dresses and studies away from the apartment more often tends to have better grades, and to be more organized. Obviously, her values revolve around academic success. She also comes from a large, strict family in the East coast. Her background has lead her to be focused and constantly goal-seeking/achieving. These assumptions testify that I judge based on appearance. It must be true when people believe others to be more or less successful and confident based on how well or poorly they are dressed. When I see well-dressed people, who also stand up straight, I believe them to be healthy and confident individuals. These kinds of realizations can actually help me in my future if I want to appear more confident.

Food As Art Research

William Deresiewicz, an essayist and critic and the author of “A Jane Austen Education: How Six Novels Taught Me About Love, Friendship, and the Things That Really Matter”, wrote his strong opinion about how here in America, “we are in danger of confusing our palates with our souls.” By this ending statement to his essay he means that like art, “food is also a genuine passion that people like to share with their friends.” It has developed in late cultural as an apparatus, which emphasizes that food exists for art, “a whole literature of criticism, journalism, appreciation, memoir and theoretical debate.” It has its awards, its designers, along with televised performances. It has become a matter of local and national pride. He also states the evolution of how our culture has designated food becoming more enriched and accepted as art. “Just as aestheticism, the religion of art, inherited the position of Christianity among the progressive classes around the turn of the 20th century, so has foodism taken over from aestheticism around the turn of the 21st.”

In her essay, “What is Art For?”, Ellen Dissanayake wrote about how art transcended into being appreciated, evaluated and understood by the “high culture” in society. In the 18th century, when postmodernism began to develop, high culture meant a culture of well-educated people who tapped into the human beauty sensors, and developed a better sense of aesthetic appreciation. Her evaluation of high-culture compares to how nowadays, appreciating, evaluating and understanding the creation of food has become a part of high culture. This type of appreciation is called “foodism”, stated by William, and the trend of art is now thought of in food masterpieces. William wrote, “food now expresses the symbolic values and absorbs the spiritual energies of the educated class.” It has become invested with the meaning of life. It is seen as the path to salvation, for the self and humanity both. However, after deep thought, food is officially not art. Both food and regular art begin by addressing the senses, but that is where food stops. It does not organize and express emotion all together. A cherry does not tell a tale, “even if we can tell a story about it.” Meals can evoke emotions, but only very generally, and only within a very limited range. Therefore, comfort, delight, perhaps nostalgia are involved, but food does not trigger anger, say, or sadness. Food is highly developed as a system of sensations.

Nobody cares if you know about Mozart or Leonardo anymore, but you had better be able to discuss the difference between ganache and couverture. William had stated that, “young men once headed to the Ivy League to acquire the patina of high culture that would allow them to move in the circles of power.” Now kids at elite schools of high culture are concerned for the ways of food–quality, type, and taste of food from different places, such as Manhattan or the San Francisco Bay Area. More and more of the young high-culture generation is trending towards the expressive possibilities of investments and careers in food. There are even many television shows, websites and plenty of other media involved in this foodism era, such as the cupcake shop, the pop-up restaurant, the high-end cookie business. Food, for young people now, is creativity, commerce, politics and health. Foodism appears to almost measure up to the importance of religion. After reading William’s essay, I have a deeper understanding of food versus art. It is no longer, “food and art”, therefore, they are two different subjects. This is all necessary and good transcendence of food, however, it is still not art.

Deresiewicz, William. (2012 October) “A Matter of Taste?” The New York Times. [The New York Times Company Web]. Retrieved Feb 1, 2014 from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/28/opinion/sunday/how-food-replaced-art-as-high-culture.html?_r=0