1.) What is the overall feel of this song?
It feels very upbeat, happy, but rather relaxed. It sounds like a funk-rock song. It just gives me the impression that everything's alright and is very chilled out.
2.) What musical elements put off that vibe?
The guitar (I think that's what it is) sounds real upbeat, and the drums make the song sound relaxed. The instrument that sounds kind of like someone clicking their tongue causes the song to feel happy, and adds to its relaxed nature.
3.) Identify the choices the musician had to make to get this feel and why they worked?
He chose to make the music faster instead of slow, which adds to the happy nature of it all, since a slower song can imply sadness. He also chose to make the funky beats prominent, which adds to the upbeat feel of it all. They all worked because all the sensations gained from the individual elements mesh together well, forming a chill, relaxed, but also upbeat and happy song to listen to.
Sunday, August 28, 2011
Semeadores by Diego Rivera
1.) SOAPSTone the painting.
Subject: workers in a field
Occasion: early 20th century
Audience: Mexican laborers/rich white people
Purpose: to show the toil planters go through
Speaker: hard labor should be distributed fairly among many people
Tone: rather grim, almost encouraging
2.) What is the meaning/theme/big idea the artist wanted you to think about? Support your answer with artistic choices he made (i.e. color, style, subject, position, etc.)
Rivera wanted the viewer to acknowledge that the hard work performed by these two planters is unpleasant and should involve more people working together to get the job done. This is shown through the use of putting dark shadows on the man working, with the stark contrast to the bright yellow ground representing that working in the fields is arduous. The subject, two planters, shows that not much work is getting done with just two people working in the fields, emphasizing the fact that more people should work together.
Subject: workers in a field
Occasion: early 20th century
Audience: Mexican laborers/rich white people
Purpose: to show the toil planters go through
Speaker: hard labor should be distributed fairly among many people
Tone: rather grim, almost encouraging
2.) What is the meaning/theme/big idea the artist wanted you to think about? Support your answer with artistic choices he made (i.e. color, style, subject, position, etc.)
Rivera wanted the viewer to acknowledge that the hard work performed by these two planters is unpleasant and should involve more people working together to get the job done. This is shown through the use of putting dark shadows on the man working, with the stark contrast to the bright yellow ground representing that working in the fields is arduous. The subject, two planters, shows that not much work is getting done with just two people working in the fields, emphasizing the fact that more people should work together.
Monday, August 22, 2011
Wilco & The Creative Process
1.) Summarize Wilco's approach to creating a song.
They go for the most straightforward way of playing the song, then sort of deconstruct it, and demolish their song in a creative way to make it more exciting.
2.) What is your creative process for writing?
Unless it's required, I don't use any sort of graphic organizer, and just sort of outline things in my head. At the very most, if I have an idea about something beforehand, I'll write it down, but only so I'll remember it later.
3.) Explain in detail the steps you go through.
I think about what I have to write, and mentally organize what I want to say, sometimes writing a few words down as indicators of what I had been thinking of, and then start writing.
They go for the most straightforward way of playing the song, then sort of deconstruct it, and demolish their song in a creative way to make it more exciting.
2.) What is your creative process for writing?
Unless it's required, I don't use any sort of graphic organizer, and just sort of outline things in my head. At the very most, if I have an idea about something beforehand, I'll write it down, but only so I'll remember it later.
3.) Explain in detail the steps you go through.
I think about what I have to write, and mentally organize what I want to say, sometimes writing a few words down as indicators of what I had been thinking of, and then start writing.
Sunday, August 21, 2011
Hello, I'm The Nostalgia Critic. I Remember It So You Don't Have To.
1.) What is nostalgia?
Nostalgia is fondly remembering the past in such a way that sort of disregards any negative aspects of the memory. It's also a yearning to go back and relive days gone by because you miss how things were back then. What you remember is sort of glorified as being better than how things are today.
2.) What images come to mind when you hear this music?
Rock Around The Clock - I get images of boys and girls having a good time, dancing, and having a party in the gym of their school, with couples dancing together.
3.) What images pop in your head when you think of your childhood? What smells, sounds, and feelings are associated with these images?
I remember playing on the playground at Maxwell, smelling the gross smell of mulch, hearing other kids screaming and yelling, and feeling rather elated that I had a break from school. I also remember having Easy Mac for lunch during preschool, with it smelling like pasta and cheese, and hearing the sound of me stirring the mac and cheese and the spoon hitting the edge of the bowl, and feeling hungry and happy that one of my favorite foods was on the menu.
Nostalgia is fondly remembering the past in such a way that sort of disregards any negative aspects of the memory. It's also a yearning to go back and relive days gone by because you miss how things were back then. What you remember is sort of glorified as being better than how things are today.
2.) What images come to mind when you hear this music?
Rock Around The Clock - I get images of boys and girls having a good time, dancing, and having a party in the gym of their school, with couples dancing together.
3.) What images pop in your head when you think of your childhood? What smells, sounds, and feelings are associated with these images?
I remember playing on the playground at Maxwell, smelling the gross smell of mulch, hearing other kids screaming and yelling, and feeling rather elated that I had a break from school. I also remember having Easy Mac for lunch during preschool, with it smelling like pasta and cheese, and hearing the sound of me stirring the mac and cheese and the spoon hitting the edge of the bowl, and feeling hungry and happy that one of my favorite foods was on the menu.
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
The Pinch Of Poverty
1.) What are the major contributing factors to poverty?
Sometimes there's a lack of jobs available, people simply aren't educated enough to find work, pay is bad, and/or people are born into impoverished families.
2.) How does this artist portray poverty (pos/neg light)?
It seems to be rather negative, since the family looks very pathetic, sad, cold, and desperate. This just reinforces the notion that poverty's a bad thing - it just brings in unpleasantness. Although one could argue that the brightness of the flowers carried by the girl signifies that there is a positive aspect to being poor, upon closer examination the entire family just seems rather worn out and generally hopeless.
3.) What is the artist's message about poverty?
Poverty is a bad thing, since it leaves people in bad condition overall, urging them to take desperate measures to get money - for example, the young girl in the painting selling flowers. However, as mentioned before, the bright flowers are like a small beacon of hope - by selling flowers, the girl and perhaps the rest of her family could break free from the bonds of impoverishment. The overall tone of the painting, though, gives the impression that it's going to take a lot of work to do that, and that hope has almost run out anyway.
4.) Identify and explain two elements of art that enhance the message.
The lack of bright colors in the painting gives the impression that poverty is like a shroud of darkness that makes your life miserable and dreary. The placement of the family, all clustered together, shows that they need to support each other in order to stay alive.
Sometimes there's a lack of jobs available, people simply aren't educated enough to find work, pay is bad, and/or people are born into impoverished families.
2.) How does this artist portray poverty (pos/neg light)?
It seems to be rather negative, since the family looks very pathetic, sad, cold, and desperate. This just reinforces the notion that poverty's a bad thing - it just brings in unpleasantness. Although one could argue that the brightness of the flowers carried by the girl signifies that there is a positive aspect to being poor, upon closer examination the entire family just seems rather worn out and generally hopeless.
3.) What is the artist's message about poverty?
Poverty is a bad thing, since it leaves people in bad condition overall, urging them to take desperate measures to get money - for example, the young girl in the painting selling flowers. However, as mentioned before, the bright flowers are like a small beacon of hope - by selling flowers, the girl and perhaps the rest of her family could break free from the bonds of impoverishment. The overall tone of the painting, though, gives the impression that it's going to take a lot of work to do that, and that hope has almost run out anyway.
4.) Identify and explain two elements of art that enhance the message.
The lack of bright colors in the painting gives the impression that poverty is like a shroud of darkness that makes your life miserable and dreary. The placement of the family, all clustered together, shows that they need to support each other in order to stay alive.
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Live Free and Starve/The Singer Solution to World Poverty
Let me start this off by saying that I read Live Free and Starve first, and went into The Singer Solution to World Poverty agreeing with the first article. However, upon delving into the second article, I was immediately bombarded with what seemed to me cries of how I'm a terrible person, etc. etc. Needless to say, my opinion on the second article sank rather low and barely lifted its head throughout the reading.
The first article, Live Free and Starve, was written by Chitra Divakaruni, an Indian woman who has seen first hand the effects of poverty on people. Her article discussed a bill to be passed by the House banning all imports of goods from factories that use child labor. She continues by explaining that despite the fact that these children are working in terrible and inhumane conditions, they do need this money to make ends meet in some fashion. Like, Singer, she does encourage donation to those stricken by poverty, though in a much less forceful way and for a different reason - she wants money to be sent towards providing education and healthcare for the children who are suddenly without any source of income, instead of letting them be free of abuse, but suddenly bogged down by the pressure of trying to stay alive. She says that 'It is easy for us in America to make the error of evaluating situations in the rest of the world as though they were happening in this country and propose solutions that make excellent sense - in the context of our society.' This just goes to show that we, as Americans, and generally unknowing of the consequences of ending the inhumane practice of child labor, don't necessarily take into account the repercussions of our actions in terms of other cultures. It is a selfless gesture, one could say, but at the same time, Americans as a whole are thinking only of their own society when it comes to this particular bill.
The second article, titled The Singer Solution to World Poverty, is a rather conceitedly named article discussing, obviously, the author's 'solution' to world poverty. He argues, essentially, that Americans simply squander their money on frivolous luxuries, when studies have shown that $200 can help a 'sickly two-year-old transform into a healthy six-year-old', and practically orders the reader to donate that money as soon as possible, even going so far as to make the claim that 'In the light of this conclusion, I trust that many readers will reach for the phone and donate that $200. Perhaps you should do it before reading further.' While I do understand his point of view, that those of us in first-world-countries certainly do have a lot of disposable income that could go towards providing for those who are much less fortunate than us, simply the way his article is presented and how he phrases everything is what makes the reading, as a whole, undesirable. His intentions are good, but when it comes to the practicality of it all, Singer falls short. Not many Americans are willing to give away their money, even if for a good cause. After all, his order that 'Whatever money you are spending on luxuries, not necessities, should be given away,' can be disputed. That $600 laptop someone buys enables them to gather information about the world around them, and learn about all the strife going on in less-developed nations, and ways to aid them that aren't just buying them food.
Prior to reading these articles, I can't exactly say that I had any sort of bias. I was, admittedly, ignorant on what exactly 'ending child labor' would result in - Divakaruni educated me on that, helping me realize that simply removing children from such horrible conditions isn't enough, that money should go into preventing those children from being a financial burden on their already troubled family. This, to me, is a much more powerful argument than Singer's constant cries of heartlessness and wastefulness, which is more of a deterrent to what he's saying than anything. All in all, Divakaruni's article is the one that I much prefer and agree with. Her argument is simply presented in a much more understandable, educational, and academic way, as compared to Singer's seemingly radical, aggressive article full of statistics and emotional manipulation.
The first article, Live Free and Starve, was written by Chitra Divakaruni, an Indian woman who has seen first hand the effects of poverty on people. Her article discussed a bill to be passed by the House banning all imports of goods from factories that use child labor. She continues by explaining that despite the fact that these children are working in terrible and inhumane conditions, they do need this money to make ends meet in some fashion. Like, Singer, she does encourage donation to those stricken by poverty, though in a much less forceful way and for a different reason - she wants money to be sent towards providing education and healthcare for the children who are suddenly without any source of income, instead of letting them be free of abuse, but suddenly bogged down by the pressure of trying to stay alive. She says that 'It is easy for us in America to make the error of evaluating situations in the rest of the world as though they were happening in this country and propose solutions that make excellent sense - in the context of our society.' This just goes to show that we, as Americans, and generally unknowing of the consequences of ending the inhumane practice of child labor, don't necessarily take into account the repercussions of our actions in terms of other cultures. It is a selfless gesture, one could say, but at the same time, Americans as a whole are thinking only of their own society when it comes to this particular bill.
The second article, titled The Singer Solution to World Poverty, is a rather conceitedly named article discussing, obviously, the author's 'solution' to world poverty. He argues, essentially, that Americans simply squander their money on frivolous luxuries, when studies have shown that $200 can help a 'sickly two-year-old transform into a healthy six-year-old', and practically orders the reader to donate that money as soon as possible, even going so far as to make the claim that 'In the light of this conclusion, I trust that many readers will reach for the phone and donate that $200. Perhaps you should do it before reading further.' While I do understand his point of view, that those of us in first-world-countries certainly do have a lot of disposable income that could go towards providing for those who are much less fortunate than us, simply the way his article is presented and how he phrases everything is what makes the reading, as a whole, undesirable. His intentions are good, but when it comes to the practicality of it all, Singer falls short. Not many Americans are willing to give away their money, even if for a good cause. After all, his order that 'Whatever money you are spending on luxuries, not necessities, should be given away,' can be disputed. That $600 laptop someone buys enables them to gather information about the world around them, and learn about all the strife going on in less-developed nations, and ways to aid them that aren't just buying them food.
Prior to reading these articles, I can't exactly say that I had any sort of bias. I was, admittedly, ignorant on what exactly 'ending child labor' would result in - Divakaruni educated me on that, helping me realize that simply removing children from such horrible conditions isn't enough, that money should go into preventing those children from being a financial burden on their already troubled family. This, to me, is a much more powerful argument than Singer's constant cries of heartlessness and wastefulness, which is more of a deterrent to what he's saying than anything. All in all, Divakaruni's article is the one that I much prefer and agree with. Her argument is simply presented in a much more understandable, educational, and academic way, as compared to Singer's seemingly radical, aggressive article full of statistics and emotional manipulation.
Monday, August 15, 2011
Round and Round
The fact that this song has harmony in it doesn't necessarily affect my opinion of the song - harmony in songs can be really cool and interesting if done well, emphasis on the 'done well'. In Round and Round, the harmony doesn't seem to be very... well, harmonic, with the voices being layered on top of each other in such a way as to make the song incomprehensible. This incomprehensibility is what negatively affects my opinion of the song, since most of the time, I really want to be able to clearly hear lyrics in whatever music I'm listening to, and this song does not deliver in that department. The fact that it has a prominent bassline could sway my opinion closer to the positive spectrum of things, since it certainly makes the song catchy and fun to listen to, but the garbled lyrics sort of overpower any positive aspect the bassline could have donated to my opinion of the song overall. The correlation between the facts I picked out and my opinion in this situation is that the harmony causes me to dislike the song and the prominent bassline somewhat increases my liking of the song, but not by much. I do have biases in music, one of which being the aforementioned desire to hear the lyrics clearly, which certainly aided in forming my opinion of the song. However, songs with this sort of 'sound' to them, full of synthesizers and the like, are not unfamiliar to me, so, overall, any sort of instrumentation bias didn't come into play. All in all, my opinion of the song was pretty much single-handedly made negative by the indiscernible lyrics caused by a shoddily executed attempt at harmony.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)