RHETORIC
The Exigence of the Civil Rights Movement
Martin Luther King Jr. grew up in the unequal, segregated society of the 1950's and 60's. This exigency later caused him to take action, as he became the face of the Civil Rights Movement.
King responded directly to this exigency through his speeches and writings. In his "Give Us the Ballot" speech of 1957, King supported a change in African American voting rights. Rather than using discriminatory practices, which forced African Americans to pass a "literacy test" before allowing them the right to vote, King believed that men, regardless of their skin color, should have equal rights and opportunities. King recognized that the current system was unethical, and believed that it was morally right to take action. By doing so, he thought that our country would change for the better. If men and women could be more open-minded and accepting of each others differences, inside and out, we could break free from a segregated society, and come together as one.
"Give Us the Ballot" helped pass the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which banned discriminatory voting practices. This was one of the many ways that Martin Luther King Jr. resolved the exigence of discrimination and segregation against African Americans during the Civil Rights Movement
King responded directly to this exigency through his speeches and writings. In his "Give Us the Ballot" speech of 1957, King supported a change in African American voting rights. Rather than using discriminatory practices, which forced African Americans to pass a "literacy test" before allowing them the right to vote, King believed that men, regardless of their skin color, should have equal rights and opportunities. King recognized that the current system was unethical, and believed that it was morally right to take action. By doing so, he thought that our country would change for the better. If men and women could be more open-minded and accepting of each others differences, inside and out, we could break free from a segregated society, and come together as one.
"Give Us the Ballot" helped pass the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which banned discriminatory voting practices. This was one of the many ways that Martin Luther King Jr. resolved the exigence of discrimination and segregation against African Americans during the Civil Rights Movement
CIVIC ENGAGEMENT
Ethos and Credibility
I've been thinking a little more about ethos, and credibility in the last week or two. It makes sense that someone with more knowledge and experience would have more ethos than someone who is rambling off about something they know nothing about. But my problem with ethos is that even with experience, and facts to back up an argument, people can still be wrong, statistics can be biased, and "facts" can be inaccurate.
The other day my roommate and I were discussing the issue of marijuana, and whether or not it should be legalized. I was trying to convince her that marijuana should be legalized, that it is no more harmful than alcohol or cigarettes, and that people should have the freedom to make their own decisions unless their decisions are risking someone else's life. In other words, I stand firm in that the government should not impede upon personal freedoms unless these freedoms are threatening others. I realize, that in a blog intended to be 200-words, this is broad, that I am idealistic, and that there are always exceptions. Regardless, I have to stay on track; my blog today is not about legalizing marijuana, but about credibility.
Within our heated discussion, my roommate, I'll admit, had a few good opposing arguments that I had never thought about. As a crime, law, and justice major she brought up how when small rules are broken and the law doesn't enforce the consequences, larger problems arise; upholding citizens to even the smallest laws results in is less chaos and a greater sense of control. While defending her argument, she brought up a statistic from an article she was reading in criminology, written by some Ph.D. Unfortunately, I can't remember the statistic specifically, but all I could think of was how little we know about the man writing this article. Just because he's educated doesn't mean that his statistic is unbiased or even accurate. It's true that people who have done significant amounts of research in a field are most often considered credible, however, I feel that credibility also has to deal largely with someone's intentions, a matter that doesn't have symbolic label or degree. How do we know that the man behind the article isn't trying to sway our opinion for personal reasons, or that there aren't multiple variables within his study that are responsible for an inaccurate result?
It seems like both statistics and science are always changing. The "facts" behind dieting, for example, have changed greatly over the course of the last few decades. In the 1990's, credible nutritionists and dieticians argued that low-fat diets were the best for loosing weight, only a few years later, fats were okay, and a no-carb fad swept the nation. Now it seems science favors a Mediterranean diet, of fruits, vegetables, and healthy fats. If "credible" professionals were giving us inaccurate information as "fact" only ten or twenty years ago, it makes me wonder what "facts" of today will be proven wrong in the future.
Although my roommate and I never came to a solid agreement on legalizing marijuana, I took away something else from our discussion; I came to the understanding that credibility is more subjective than I had realized
The other day my roommate and I were discussing the issue of marijuana, and whether or not it should be legalized. I was trying to convince her that marijuana should be legalized, that it is no more harmful than alcohol or cigarettes, and that people should have the freedom to make their own decisions unless their decisions are risking someone else's life. In other words, I stand firm in that the government should not impede upon personal freedoms unless these freedoms are threatening others. I realize, that in a blog intended to be 200-words, this is broad, that I am idealistic, and that there are always exceptions. Regardless, I have to stay on track; my blog today is not about legalizing marijuana, but about credibility.
Within our heated discussion, my roommate, I'll admit, had a few good opposing arguments that I had never thought about. As a crime, law, and justice major she brought up how when small rules are broken and the law doesn't enforce the consequences, larger problems arise; upholding citizens to even the smallest laws results in is less chaos and a greater sense of control. While defending her argument, she brought up a statistic from an article she was reading in criminology, written by some Ph.D. Unfortunately, I can't remember the statistic specifically, but all I could think of was how little we know about the man writing this article. Just because he's educated doesn't mean that his statistic is unbiased or even accurate. It's true that people who have done significant amounts of research in a field are most often considered credible, however, I feel that credibility also has to deal largely with someone's intentions, a matter that doesn't have symbolic label or degree. How do we know that the man behind the article isn't trying to sway our opinion for personal reasons, or that there aren't multiple variables within his study that are responsible for an inaccurate result?
It seems like both statistics and science are always changing. The "facts" behind dieting, for example, have changed greatly over the course of the last few decades. In the 1990's, credible nutritionists and dieticians argued that low-fat diets were the best for loosing weight, only a few years later, fats were okay, and a no-carb fad swept the nation. Now it seems science favors a Mediterranean diet, of fruits, vegetables, and healthy fats. If "credible" professionals were giving us inaccurate information as "fact" only ten or twenty years ago, it makes me wonder what "facts" of today will be proven wrong in the future.
Although my roommate and I never came to a solid agreement on legalizing marijuana, I took away something else from our discussion; I came to the understanding that credibility is more subjective than I had realized
"PASSION"
What is a passion, really?
I really don't know why I feel connected to art. I wish I could tell you, take you back to a specific part of my life and explain to you how in that moment, everything changed, and art became my passion. In fact, I wish that I could sit here and tell you that art was my passion, is my passion. Unfortunately, I'm not even sure what it means to be passionate. I've seen so many people try and claim their individuality through art or film or music; I've seen them claim their "passion" in hopes of being unique. But I don't want that kind of passion. I want to believe that if someone is genuinely passionate, that they shouldn't have to scream, "This is what I'm passionate about!" because it will show, and people will recognize it.
I love the freedom, creativity, and influence that art possesses. I love that it's mysterious and unconventional, that it pushes boundaries, and changes our perceptions. I'm the first to admit that I'm not a professional art historian, or a world-renowned artist; I haven't visited all the museums in the world, or sold my paintings to galleries. I haven't mastered all of the skills and techniques, nor do I know all of the terms used to classify and understand art. I realize that I don't have the credibility and experience that people expect from someone writing an art blog. Nevertheless, I'm hoping that instead of critiquing my probably ignorant interpretations and opinions, that people will join the discussion, and start appreciating art, because ultimately, that's all I can ask for.
My plan, each week, is to choose an artwork with some sort of social or historical significance, something that has influenced me personally, and to expand upon it. Depending on the artwork, I may change the topic of discussion from week to week. For example, one week I may talk about stylistic choices, symbols, and messages, while another week I may focus more on how a particular work may have altered the course of an artist's life. Lastly, because I like creating art as much as I do viewing and researching it, I'm hoping to upload my own artwork from time to time.
Although I can't put a label on my relationship with art, it's something I undeniably feel very connected to. It has something that has personally influenced me, altering my perceptions, thoughts, and ideas. I hope that through my blog, art will be able to influence you similarly.
I love the freedom, creativity, and influence that art possesses. I love that it's mysterious and unconventional, that it pushes boundaries, and changes our perceptions. I'm the first to admit that I'm not a professional art historian, or a world-renowned artist; I haven't visited all the museums in the world, or sold my paintings to galleries. I haven't mastered all of the skills and techniques, nor do I know all of the terms used to classify and understand art. I realize that I don't have the credibility and experience that people expect from someone writing an art blog. Nevertheless, I'm hoping that instead of critiquing my probably ignorant interpretations and opinions, that people will join the discussion, and start appreciating art, because ultimately, that's all I can ask for.
My plan, each week, is to choose an artwork with some sort of social or historical significance, something that has influenced me personally, and to expand upon it. Depending on the artwork, I may change the topic of discussion from week to week. For example, one week I may talk about stylistic choices, symbols, and messages, while another week I may focus more on how a particular work may have altered the course of an artist's life. Lastly, because I like creating art as much as I do viewing and researching it, I'm hoping to upload my own artwork from time to time.
Although I can't put a label on my relationship with art, it's something I undeniably feel very connected to. It has something that has personally influenced me, altering my perceptions, thoughts, and ideas. I hope that through my blog, art will be able to influence you similarly.
An Unfinished Life
Marilyn Monroe is an icon. More than fifty years after her death she still remains one of the most recognizable women in American culture. Although she had starred in an array of films throughout the 1950’s and 60’s, she is most noted for her stunning face and voluptuous figure. My drawing from 2010, entitled “Unfinished,” explores the fascination that our society has with Marilyn Monroe. It explores the life behind her image, focusing more on her true self, outside of the public eye.
I chose to leave her facial features blank, in part to prove that without completing her face, one can still recognize that it is Marilyn in the image. Ironically, nearly everyone can identify her incomplete image while only few people are able to identify one of the 29 movies she appeared in. Even less can say they’ve watched one. My point is that Monroe is not noted for her talent or works, but rather her looks. Our culture is not interested in knowing who she was or what she did, but instead what she looked like. By leaving her face blank, I had hoped to peak a sense of curiosity, a curiosity of the real Marilyn Monroe, behind the glitz and glamour.
The incompleteness was also my way of referencing her equally unfinished life. As many may well know, Marilyn died tragically at the age of 36. Today in Hollywood stars are constantly coming and going, youth is valued, and beauty is brief. If Marilyn hadn’t died a tragic death, would her iconic image be the same as it is today? If she had aged in front of us, would we still consider her one of the most beautiful women of all time?
Recently, Hollywood has revived Marilyn Monroe’s true character through films such as “My week with Marilyn,” featuring Michelle Williams and shows like Smash. I’m happy to see that instead of a sole interest in her beauty, that America is also interested in understanding who she really was, her personal struggles and why her name lives on.
Kees van Dongen, Maria
Words cannot describe how in love I am with Kees van Dongen's Maria. This painting, in fact, was the reason why I chose to create an art blog. This painting. I didn't know anything about it the first time I saw it in the Metropolitan Museum of Art in 2011, nor do I really know much about it now. Nonetheless it has affected me in ways I can't even begin to explain. This painting reflects what it is I love about art, the freedom of expression, and who it is that I hope to become as an artist.
There is something so free and expressionistic about the wild brushstrokes and unexpected coloring of the work. It's a portrait of a young woman, but it manages to reveal more about the artist and his true perception than anything else. His rapid movements are unrestrained and in the moment. It's a diary entry in the form of an oil painting, over exaggerate and violent, but passionate. Like a diary, where hurried thoughts are quickly jotted down with little thought or care as to what it is being said, if you really mean it, or who it may affect, this painting works in a similar manner. Kees van Dongen is not in anyway holding back. The work isn't planned and he's not overthinking every brushstroke. He's painting what he feels, adding green and purple shadows when he wants to and giving his model bulging eyes even if it may seem "unrealistic". He's painting from his subconscious, letting his emotions run wild and without a filter. This ultimate sense of honest self-expression and the relief that follows is exactly what makes art so movingly beautiful.
There is something to gain by expressing pure thought and feeling, rather than suppressing them with logic, a point that Kees van Dongen somewhat indirectly exposes through the painting Maria. Ultimately, It's this painting that has transformed my idea of art, and encouraged me to stay true to my emotions, my thoughts, and myself.
There is something so free and expressionistic about the wild brushstrokes and unexpected coloring of the work. It's a portrait of a young woman, but it manages to reveal more about the artist and his true perception than anything else. His rapid movements are unrestrained and in the moment. It's a diary entry in the form of an oil painting, over exaggerate and violent, but passionate. Like a diary, where hurried thoughts are quickly jotted down with little thought or care as to what it is being said, if you really mean it, or who it may affect, this painting works in a similar manner. Kees van Dongen is not in anyway holding back. The work isn't planned and he's not overthinking every brushstroke. He's painting what he feels, adding green and purple shadows when he wants to and giving his model bulging eyes even if it may seem "unrealistic". He's painting from his subconscious, letting his emotions run wild and without a filter. This ultimate sense of honest self-expression and the relief that follows is exactly what makes art so movingly beautiful.
There is something to gain by expressing pure thought and feeling, rather than suppressing them with logic, a point that Kees van Dongen somewhat indirectly exposes through the painting Maria. Ultimately, It's this painting that has transformed my idea of art, and encouraged me to stay true to my emotions, my thoughts, and myself.