Academic Decathlon Literature/Writing: July 2012

Friday, July 27, 2012

Virtual Exhibit Proposal

Theme: European Modern Art - 20th Century

Name: Avant-Garde Europe

Reason: Want to see how weird art really gets, well come on in! Europe has long been the region to go to view some of the weirdest artworks ever produced by an artist. Includes Western Europe and Russia. It will be educational because it will expand childrens' and adults' imaginations to become inspired and be artists. It will be important to the public because it may give relaxation and contemplation to adults in such a fast and busy culture.

LACMA Modern Art Visit Observations

Contemporary Art - Art that is concurrent with the modern art from the 1960s to the present. It is usually avant-garde and is not as conservative or traditional as art from before the 1960s. A notable part of contemporary art is post-modernism.

Does Contemporary Art have specific boundaries? If so, what are they?

In postmodernism art, tradition has been displaced by liberalism and increased freedom of thought in general. Many modern movements and such have encouraged such liberal thinking. As exemplified by artists such as Jackson Pollock. There really is no limit to what you can do nowadays, from blobs of paint to abstract lines and shapes. Even the simplest subjects can be manipulated into magnificent and otherwordly pieces.

Thursday, July 19, 2012

Art of Many Cultures LACMA

1. Ceremonial Ball Game Mexico Nayarit

Color: Light brown

Line: Organic, but geometric for the court outline

Material/Media: Ceramic with slip and other pigments

Shape: Rectangular court and organic people shapes to depict players

Symbol(s): None

Texture: Looks a bit rough

2. Flower Day Diego River

Color: Browns, white, green, and yellows

Line: Organic lines

Material/Media: Oil painting on canvas

Shape: Organic shapes occupy the whole of the painting

Symbol(s): None

Texture: None implied

3. Mourners Mexico, Nayarit

Color: Shade of Brown

Line: Organic lines except the tube-like object going along the figures' mouths, which seems geometric enough

Material/Media: Sculpture, slip-painted ceramic with incised decoration

Shape: Organic shapes

Symbol(s): The tube-like objects along their mouths may be a type of flute to play music during a type of funeral.

Texture: Rough-like texture of the clay

4. Covered Double Sprout and Bridge Vessel Peru South coast

Color: Dark brown

Line: Organic and geometric on the top of the container

Material/Media: Ceramic, incised and resin painted

Shape: Organic shape composes the entire container

Symbol(s): Artwork on the container cover may depict Incan cultural decorations

Texture: Smooth texture

5. LAMP Eastern Mediterranean

Color: Translucent bluish color

Line: Mostly geometric

Material/Media: Utilitarian object; glass, pale aquamarine glass with applied decoration

Shape: Conical shape

Symbol(s): None

Texture: Smooth

6. St. Michael Casting Satan into Hell Domenico Antonio Vacaro

Color: Polychrome, many varieties of colors, golden base

Line: Organic except for geometric lines of sword held by St. Michael figure

Material/Media: Sculpture, polychromed wood and glass

Shape: Organic shapes depicting a battle between an angel and a devil on top of a

Symbol(s): Religious symbols depicting the downfall of Lucifer

Texture: Smooth

Definitions and examples of modern art movements - Modern Art LACMA

Cubism - Emphasized two dimensions, which fit into the space of the canvas. Therefore, cubism is supposed to break up objects into separate parts, mostly cubic shapes, and assemble them so as to vaguely represent what they depict.

Modern - Includes any artistic works from the period of the 1860s to the 1970s, depicting philosophy and ideas of the time and pointing towards abstraction

Expressionism - A modernist movement that originated in Germany during the early 20th century and is supposed to represent a subjective view of the world that distorts rationally and emotionally.

Texture - the perceived surface quality of a work of art

Impressionism - Is an art movement that originated in Paris and involves light brush strokes, emphasizing the effects of light, and put implied movement without making it actually seem like movement.

Surrealism - Feature an element of surprise, unexpected juxtapositions, and non sequitir.

Juxtaposition - the placement of two objects (sometimes abstract) near each other

Shape - An object located in space with geometric qualities.

Line - Represent the path of a dot in space.

Pop Art - Art that involves cultural symbols taken from its known context.

Nonobjective art - Art that does not depict a person, place, or thing in the real world but instead focuses on the composition method as opposed to what is being depicted.

Realism - Art meant to depict objective reality, almost as a form of photography. Meant to be a snapshot of the real world.

Wednesday, July 18, 2012

Seeing is Believing Worksheet

Portrait of a Man - Franz Hals

Color: Mostly neutral colors like black, near-black, and white, all which are very stark in intensity considering the contrast between the white and black colors on the man. The white is very light and the black colors are very dark in value.

Contour: The man's figure is clearly defined on the top but as we go down the figure, his shape starts to blend in to the background, perhaps because the artist wanted us to focus on the man's head and shoulders.

Gesture: The man's pose is dynamic and suggests movement, unlike many of the stiff portraits of the day.

Composition: Unrefined brush strokes and a gentle pose coming from the subject of the painting give liveliness and spontaneity. It was composed of oil painting on canvas.

Line: Organic lines compose much of the figure.

Shape: Negative space occupies the area behind the man being painted. Positive space is occupied of only organic shapes, the man's head and shoulders.

Perspective: Horizontal perspective, we are looking at the man from his level.

The Magdalene with the Smoking Flame

Color: Whites, reds, and other shades of brown. Colors near the flame have high brightness while colors away from the flame have relatively dull intensities. The same goes in terms of whiteness to darkness, as it progresses away from the flame's origin or point of beginning, as in a painting.

Contour: Contour is defined near the flame but away from the flame, it seems to blend in into the background.

Gesture: Relatively pastoral as the woman is sitting down and simply staring at a flame, who represents Mary Magdalene, mother of God.

Composition: Oil painting on canvas, Light is supposed to represent the "living flame of love" which is what pilgrims refer to in order to escape the darkness in their lives. Reflective qualities really dominate the painting as the only light source is the flame. Horizontal and vertical shapes within the painting draw us into Mary's contemplation.

Line: Organic lines dominate the painting, albeit only shadows, not actual lines.

Shape: Organic shapes that have definition closest to the flame but less as we go farther from the source of the flame.

Perspective: Horizontal.

The Kentuckian

Color: Mostly shades of brown. A light source that emanates from outside the field of the painting provides the color, in which the figures of the Kentuckian, his son, and his dog display rather dully, giving them a plasticky look. Lightness dominates the painting to emphasize the power and strength of the Kentuckian frontierman and his companions.

Contour: Very clearly defined to make it seem bold.

Gesture: The father and his companions seem to be on the move for an unseen objective outside of the painting's world.

Composition: Made to publicize a 1953 film called the Kentuckian, it really brings out that down to earth frontier spirit that made this country what it is. It was painted by oil painting on canvas.

Line: Crisp outlines form the figures into their boldness.

Shape: Organic shapes that really stand out to emphasize the Kentucky frontiersman.

Perspective: Linear

The Liberator

Color: Blues, greens, and browns dominate painting's color palette. All colors have high intensity and high brightness.

Contour: Very clearly defined contours of the figure in the center and even the blue "building" in the background.

Gesture: Pastoral, figure in the painting is sitting down.

Composition: Oil on canvas. Supposed to be a product of surrealism, it really does not make any sense.

Line: Geometric in background, organic in foreground.

Shape: Organic shapes in foreground, geometric shape (the blue building/tower) in the background.

Perspective: Linear

Saturday, July 14, 2012

Consider questions for Anger by Hans Siebert von-Heister

1. Does the artist use distinct working methods working methods and processes?

It appears to be a Bauhaus work as the artist, Hans-Siebert von Heister, began this movement in 1919 as an offspring of the German Expressionist movement of the pre-war era. As an expressionist work, the work uses many warm colors alongside the black and stark red background behind the strange creature in the middle, assumed to be a characterization of anger. Therefore, yes.

2. Has the artwork been created in isolation, in collaboration, with a fabrication team? What kinds of materials were used? Traditional, unconventional, or a combination?

It seems to have been made by a single artist as the style of the painting is consistent throughout with the stark triangular shapes in the top, center, and bottom of the painting. Materials used were oil paint on a canvas. Therefore, a traditional material and method was used to create the artwork.

3. Does the artwork reference elements from popular culture, mass media, or art history?

It references the anger experienced by the Germans following World War I which was part of the popular culture of Germany at the time. Therefore, yes, somewhat.

4. Does the artwork serve as a form of critique, questioning, or reframing debates about art or society?

It does seem to question German society and its apparent blindness to the reality that the Germans were thrust upon by the Allied powers following World War I. Also, it expresses anger at the fact that the defeated Germans were in a state of constant poverty while the Allies look on and continue failed attempts to refinance them.

LACMA Questions

What is your definition of art?

Art is the human attempt to describe their world using visual elements. Different methods of conveying that description are numerous.

What are the traditional subjects of art?

Male figure, female figure, nature, war, mythology, love, history

What are the tools and materials of art?

Paint, pencil, paintbrush, ink, pen, chisel, molds, stone, pigments from nature, oil, water, egg, needles, wood, metal, anything solid or malleable

What different purposes or reasons do artists create art?

To depict their ideas of subjects in their own personal style in a visual manner. To send a message to someone else or a group of people. To create something for people to enjoy for either a short amount of time or for a timeless purpose. To decorate something with a utilitarian value.

In what ways can works of art reflect the society in which they were made?

Through the subject matter, the materials used, the way the subject is depicted in the artwork, the message the artwork may or may not be trying to send, and the time period in which the artwork was made.

Tuesday, July 10, 2012

Blog Russian History Questions

1. Consider why Post-Soviet states would feel eager to lay claim to early Rus' identity. Which modern state do you feel has the strongest claim?

In the instability and conflict following the fall of the Soviet Union from 1989 to 1991, many former Soviet republics regained their national identity by declaring themselves as Estonians, Latvians, or Lithuanians and freeing themselves of the chains of Soviet domination. This uprising of nationalism practically ended the Soviet Union as the drastic loss in power and money spelled its end and heralded the newly formed but shakily organized Russian Federation. The Rus' were people originating from Sweden that invaded what is now Russia during the Dark Ages in Europe and lay waste and plunder to the countryside, establishing a princedom that would be the predecessor to the pre-Petrian Russian principalities. As part of the drive for nationalism during the Mongol occupation, Russian rulers decided to adopt the "Russian" identity as a herald to their ancestral ties, the Vikings, of which the Rus' were related to. Successfully gaining some form of an identity, the Russian principalities slowly weakened the Mongol empire and eliminated all forms of control by the mid-15th century. Post-Soviet states, specifically the Russian Federation itself, would want to lay claim to Rus' ancestry to regain popularity and trust in the people, especially since the Russian government frequently suffers from crime, corruption, and economic issues due to the relative lack of control that was present during the Soviet era. Sweden has the strongest claim because it was the homeland of the Rus' people themselves before they moved into Modern Ukraine and Southwestern Russia and because of the everlasting presence of a strong Swedish identity that must have some substance to it.

A modern state that I would consider to have legitimate claim to the Rus' identity are the Swedes. Despite never having been dominated by the Soviet Union during the Cold War, the land of origin of the Rus' is Sweden. Despite this, modern politics and shifts in world power frequently overlook Sweden's powerful national identity that has enabled them to survive during even the toughest times in European history, such as its wars with Russia during the 1600s and 1700s, the rise of European nationalism in the mid-1800s, the World Wars, and the Cold War. Russians, thus, have a somewhat direct lineage to the Swedes despite the huge difference in language structure, Swedish being a North Germanic language and Russian being a Slavic language. However, migration and inter-relations with the local Slavic people during the early Rus' era began a new race of people destined to rule and expand like their forefathers.

Post-Soviet states would want to lay claim to the Rus' identity, such as Russia, during this modern era because of the lack of unity between these Post-soviet states, specifically between the European and Asian states. Also, the rampant corruption, crime, and conflict in post-Soviet Russia brings doubt into the democratic, free market system that defines the Russian Federation. The Rus' people themselves were a powerful entity in the Slavic homeland because of their ability to wage wars over long distances and to establish a polity that would eventually become one of the most powerful states in Europe. It would make sense, therefore, to lay claim to such fame in order to instill pride, trust, and confidence in the ability of the Russian government to maintain order and stability in the midst of a distressing modern world.

In conclusion, the Rus' identity should be directly attributed to Swedes because of their constant presence of a unifying identity that has enabled them to survive the toughest times in European history. However, due to shifts in world power, Swedes are often overlooked in terms of historical attributions and such which are usually given to the Russians post-haste. Thus, modern-day Russia and possibly other post-Soviet states like the Ukraine would herald such a relatively powerful and vigorous people because of the ability of the Rus' to wage long distance wars without hesitation and even establish a semi-state that would grow into the powerful Russian principalities. In the midst of a Russia and post-Soviet world shattered by conflict, crime, corruption, and weak economies, a seemingly vague but powerful unifying force could inspire the modern-day European post-Soviet states to claim a place in history as an equally vigorous and successful nation to rise up in the midst of the mire of a conflicted modern world.

2. Russian identity could be argued to have been formed by military, religious, and political institutions. Which do you think played the most important role to its development and why?

Russian history has been defined by three aspects. Russia's military history has shaped its identities through the conquests of the Rus' people that led to them populating what is now Russia, to the Mongol invasions that posed the greatest challenge in Russian history, to the expansion of the Russian empire under Ivan III, Ivan IV, and Peter the Great, all which led to greater unity and pride from the people in their leaders. Religion has shaped Russian identity because the Orthodox Church maintained a mostly Christian identity even under the Mongol occupation and eventually roused an effective resistance under several princes that ended in a unified sovereignty under Ivan III that effectively ended Mongol rule in 1462. Russian political history has shaped Russia's national identity through the formation of several Russian principalities that claimed total or partial control of the entire Russian homeland. Eventually, this ended in the unification of Russia under Ivan III that led to the Tsardom of Russia that in itself unified the Russian people under an autocratic but effective ruler. However, in retrospect, religion was the most important part in the development of the Russian identity due to the fact that without religion, Russia would not have been a major figure in Christianity that it is now and would have been hampered by the introduction of tribal religions and Islam from the Mongols that could have dis-unified the Russian people.

The Orthodox Christian Church remained a powerful figure to the Russian people even while they were under the occupation of the powerful and fearful Mongol Empire, later the Golden Horde. In time, several Russian princes would mount an effective resistance to Mongol rule that culminated in several famous battles in Russian history like the Battle of Kulikovo, symbolizing the Russians' powerful unity. Also, by the Mongols allowing Orthodox Christianity to remain as the primary religion of the Russian people, they allowed the Russians to further explore their identity by maintaining their education systems, government, and way of life. Without this, Russia would not be as big as it is today and would be more disunited with the onset of Islam introduced by the Mongols spreading into the heart of Russia like an infection. Even the Russian princes that mounted effective campaigns against the Mongols depended on religion to guide them and give them strength against a foe so formidable.

Overall, Russian history has been primarily influenced by three things: military, religion, and politics. Russia's military history has been an influential factor because of the fact that military expansion and conflict were what led to the Rus' people's establishment of a loose state in central Russia, leading to the origins of the Russian people, the throwing off of Mongol rule, and the expansion of the Russian empire to the farthest extents of the Eurasian continent. Religion is influential in Russia because it united them and maintained their uniqueness even under Mongol occupation, thus providing Russians with a way to continue their way of life relatively unmitigated, apart from the regular tributaries and taxes. Political history helped develop the Russian identity through the maintenance of the separate Russian principalities even under Mongol rule. Eventually, they unified under Ivan III and overthrew Mongol rule and established a tsardom that would last for over 400 years and become an effective government body under rulers such as Ivan IV and Peter the Great that shaped Russia into what it is now, a nation of Europe considered a major power even today. However, religion was the greatest factor in the development of the Russian identity because even when princes fell under Mongol attack and their military crushed under the vast hordes of the Mongols, the Orthodox religion, maintained under the Mongols' tolerant rule, united the Russian people even when there failed to be an effective Russian ruler over them. Religion would provide the inspiration for resistance like in the Battle of Kulikovo and a way for the Russian people to continue their way of life unmitigated that has made them into such a strong and resilient people even in the face of certain domination.

3. Why would the Rus', following Peter the Great's reign be divided into the Western and Slavophile camps? What are the aspects that could favor or disfavor one side?

During the early 1700s, Peter the Great began an era of reform and Westernization called the Russian Enlightenment that emphasized the arts and sciences as well as modernization, specifically in the case of Russian laws and the serfs. St. Petersburg is the greatest symbol of this new era, which also began Russia's recognition by Europe as a substantial power that should be noticed and wary of, especially since Russia's territory has increased twofold and had recently fought a long and bloody war with Sweden that was the first time its newly Westernized army fought. Unfortunately, many old and traditional Russians saw Westernization as the destruction of old Russian values and heritage stemming from the Rus' people and were proud of their relative isolation from the problems, wars, and posh of Europe's monarchies. These people who resisted change were the Slavophiles and those who rejected their ideals became reformers. However, change was inevitable and was a long time coming. Division was present because the Slavophiles and reformers disagreed on the principle of how to shape Russian culture, while the Slavophiles had mostly the support of the gentry and the poor, their condition probably would have been worsened had the modernization of Russian law not been achieved. Vice versa, reformers would have been limited in popular support but still enabled Russia to modernize and became a power worthy of recognition by the Western European powers, whom they would fight with some in the War of the Austrian Succession.

Division was rampant between the Slavophiles and the western reformers because they did not agree on how to reform or not reform Russian society, which the Slavophiles were content with. Slavophiles saw Modernization as an opportunity by the aristocracy to increase power and put the serfs under increased bondage. Western reformers, on the other hand, wanted to Westernize Russia to make itself notable to Western Europe and hopefully, to be feared as its army grew to a size challenging even the best armies of Europe. They saw Russia's growing empire and involvement in European affairs as an opportunity to jump upon and they would be largely successful in using it as an advantage.

Slavophiles had the advantage of numbers. Many gentry and serfs did not want reform and even when they seemingly got it, their condition either worsened or stayed the same as indicated by Pugachev's rebellion of 1773. Slavophiles saw Western reform as an opportunity by the aristocracy to increase their power and bondage of the serfs. They also desired the old Russian traditions tracing back to the early Rus' period to remain as a symbol of Russian national identity, which could be destroyed in the midst of Westernization. However, their disadvantage was that they had little vision of the future of Russia if it westernized, which would mean that in the future, serfs would eventually be free as laws continue to be reformed. As the 1800s came along, Western liberalism and thought encouraged the freeing of the serfs, which would occur in 1861. Also, they did not see the improvements in education and the economy that reform brought.

Western reformers had the advantage of vision and superior ideals, relative to the Slavophilic idea of keeping the old Russian traditions. In a quickly modernizing world in the early 1700s, it was important to adopt Western ideas to avoid being left behind in the annals of European history and to have better education to improve everyone's general situation. Their disadvantage was that they mostly did not have popular support, especially during the liberal European movement during the 2nd quarter of the 19th century, which introduced Slavophilia and the hope of a more traditionally-based Russia. Eventually, the Socialist and then Communist party of Russia would jump upon Slavophilia as an opportunity to exert control over the population and promise them a better life that the Russia monarchy could never give them, no matter how many reforms they pasted over another.

Division between Slavophilia and Western reform was present because of the opposite desires of the Russian aristocracy and the general population, specifically the serfs, in how to change Russian society. Slavophiles had the advantage of relative popular support because of their idea of maintaining Russian national identity through tradition, which Europeanization would surely destroy. However, they did not have vision and foresee a future where reform might better their situation and give them freedom, which occurred in 1861. Western reformers had the advantage of that vision as well as the opportunity to show themselves as a powerful nation to Europe after they began making gains in Europe during their war with Sweden. Also, the building of St. Petersburg represented this Europeanization as Peter the Great adopted Western building techniques and architecture to complete his magnificent port city. However, they were limited by lack of popular support and the fact that the serfs were still not freed in the first century of this Russian Enlightenment as exemplified by Pugachev's rebellion in 1773 in an era of liberalization and democratic ideals emerging in France and the United States. Also, their relative slowness to reform were what limited the Russian monarchy in the long run and led to their downfall in 1917.

4. What are the possible advantages and disadvantages of colonization from above versus colonization from below? For the colonization from below, what would cause this phenomenon?

During the expansion of the Russian Empire after the end of Mongol domination, two groups of Russians ventured into central and eastern Russia, peasants and aristocratic ventures using the military. Peasants sought land in central and eastern Russia to obtain a new life away from the gentry and aristocracy. The aristocracy of Russia launched military expeditions beginning with Ivan IV to conquer the rest of modern-day Russia funded by the aristocracy themselves. Soon, the Russian tsardom became an empire that would eventually challenge even the Western European empires of Britain, France, and Germany. An advantage of colonization from above is the availability of money while a disadvantage is that by spreading eastward, communication becomes less and less effective to the point where it becomes almost defunct and isolation is imminent; colonization from below is possible because poor peasants and serfs seek a new life with the advantage of a drive and goal in mind as well as great availability of land towards the east but a disadvantage is the lack of money and possibly adequate supplies that make the journey difficult and often dangerous.

Colonization from above was begun by the Russian aristocracy during the 16th century in order to expand their territory into the defeated and greatly weakened khanates that remained as successors to the original Mongol empire. Using the military effectively, the Russians would reach the Pacific by the mid-1600s, establishing their effective control over all of modern-day Russia. A great advantage was the presence of large amounts of money to fund such expeditions by the aristocracy. A disadvantage was the farther east the Russians went, the harder it was to communicate with the population centers of European Russia, making isolation possible. In the end, it was the most effective due to the excellent use of the military to expand far and wide in a relatively short amount of time.

Colonization from below was encouraged by the oppression and hard conditions peasants and serfs faced in Western Russia. Thus, many families and peasants decided to head eastward to seek a new life and new land to make a comfortable living. A disadvantage of this was the hostile climate of the East as well as the relative lack of money and adequate supplies by the peasants to make such a long and dangerous journey. An advantage was the presence of a drive and willingness to go where no Russian had gone before. Almost similar to the Western expansion associated greatly with American history, the Russians achieved the same thing 300 years earlier, fighting natives and obtaining frontier outposts that stretched all the way to the profitable fishing ports of the pacific.

During the 16th century, Russia undertook a grand expedition to take all of modern-day Russia in order to defeat and subjugate the greatly weakened khanates that succeeded the Mongol Empire of 3 centuries before. Colonization from above and below occurred as both the rich and the poor had different goals on the far east. The poor had the advantage of a drive but a lack of adequate supplies while the rich had the advantage of money and adequate supplies but a disadvantage of the lack of effective communication that could cause isolation from the civilized West. Eventually, both groups made it to the east by 1650 and had an effective control and presence over all of modern-day Russia.