Carla Potter Essay Essays

Carla Potter Essay Essays Carla Potter Essay Essay Carla Potter Essay Essay Ceramic creative person Carla Potter draws on her roots near the ocean to make sculpture that call the sea life to mind. conveying the vivacious ocean-themed pieces so about to life one time can about smell the salt air. With a piece called â€Å"Leviathan† . she inspires the beauty that possibly an ancient sea monster might non hold been able to. and throws in a spot of the repose of the oceanscape and a just sum of â€Å"What is that? ’ In her artist statement. Potter says that it is the receeding tide that inspires her work. Her medium is clay and though some of her sculptures are besides ceramic vass. much of her work is merely superb renderings of the sea life brought back to life with glazes and pigments designed to maintain them looking moisture long after the tide has rolled back out to sea. Potter is from Ketchikan. Alaska. and went to the lower 48 to analyze dance. While at that place. she discovered there she could â€Å"express grace† much easier through utilizing merely her custodies alternatively of utilizing her full organic structure ( Biography. 2007 ) . She finally turned her surveies to ceramics and earned her unmarried man of humanistic disciplines from Humbolt State College ( Biography. 2007 ) . Then. Potter wrote athe web site that local friends convinced her to move as creative person in abode at the simple schools in her place town for the following decennary while raising her ain kids. During that clip. she besides participated Immigration and Naturalization Services everal solo exhibits throughout Alaska and many juried and combined shows in the remainder o the state. Her work can be seen in the Alaska State Museum and several private museums across the province every bit good as in many private aggregations. In 2005-2006. she was the creative person in abode for the Archie Bray foundation ( Archie Bray. 2006 ) . Photographs from Potter’s concluding exhibit at Archie Bray are available online and demo some of the versatility of her work while staying true to her basic subject of ocean life. In her artist’s statement. Potter writes. â€Å"Flashing aureate seaweed. tonss of tumbled. coiled and strewn kelp fronds create a slippery head covering over the busy universes of pediculosis pubis. bantam fishes. windflowers. invertebrates and every texture and colour of sea star. It is a moisture. 3-dimensional brocade that evokes the munificent costumes of can-can terpsichoreans or ladies of the dark. † Even her words flow as a warm and fun description of the sea subjects. but fail to make her work justness. While â€Å"Leviathan† is a simple piece. raising the image of a isolated tentacle skiding up through a heap of moist mussels. her â€Å"Rock Oyster Pitcher† is a labyrinth of bantam inside informations experiencing like a hurler that has been excessively long at the underside of the seas and is covered in coral ( Artist. 2007 ) . The lovely hurler calls to mind shipwrecks and lost financial officers and the admiration that it has someway survived under the sea. Of peculiar involvement is the daintiness that Potter reflects in this work done in 2000 when compared to the more significant â€Å"Leviathan. † The other joy of looking at Potter’s work is that she is able to meld signifier and colour to do the spectator feel as though she is about to make out and touch shells fresh from the sear. Her piece â€Å"Flamenco† from 2002 expressions like a sea windflower and feels newly plucked from a crystal blue tidal pool. ( Potter 2002 Collection. 2007 ) . The piece decidedly harkens back to the artist’s statement about her work. when she wrote. † Though the expression and feel of my work is inspired by life in and around the border of the sea. the capable affair is closely paired with my experience of civilization. I love to unite the jail spongy surface of a sea Cucumis sativus with the doubtful comfort and signifier of Victorian furniture. † ( Artist Statement 2007 ) . I love the construct of uniting nature and the edgy signifier of formal trappingss. Her work is like a manner to convey the seaboard indoors without the malodor of something deceasing in a shell and without holding to kill the animate being that one time called the shell place. Potter’s work is an invitation to those of us who have merely seen the sea through old Jaques Costeau images or through Hollywood’s lens. Alternatively of the extremely conventionalized colourss of Hollywood. we have the imaginativeness and memories of a adult female who spent her life on the Pacific Ocean and wants to portion that love with the remainder of the universe. Her plants someway manages to name to mind the texture and feel of the tidal pools. an consequence she managed to accomplish through old ages of experiments with high temperature glazes ( Artist Statement 2004 ) . â€Å"For the past three old ages I have been experimenting with porcelain and high fire oxidization glazes. These glazes have a surface that is heavy with an elusive deepness and beauty. The colour effects would be impossible to retroflex with under glazes. It besides provides me with a new avenue to research the matrimony of colour and signifier unburdened by nonsubjective representation. † ( Artist Statement 2004 ) . Indeed the combination of the porcelain and high fire glazes has kept her work with the wet expression and the daintiness common to many nautical animate beings. An interesting turn in Potter’s work was the creative activity of a Cake Topper in her 2006 aggregation. The piece features authoritative images of Adam and Eve standing in a garden of green cirripeds and black mussels. ( Potter 2006 ) . The figure work is evocative of Michaelangelo’s David. complete with the deficiency of weaponries below the mid-bicep. The piece is really authoritative in feel and astonishing given the size of the piece. The piece is merely 16 inches tall ( Potter 2006 ) . This may be my favourite of the pieces that Potter has on show at her web site. It is a fantastic combination of the history of art and the add-on of natural beauty to an indoor art piece. The thought that nature’s beauty can be brought indoors via Potter’s work is really appealing to me. I find Carla Potter’s work to be animating and technically adept. something that I believe is losing from many modern creative persons. Her delicate work in porcelain shows that she has the proficient abilities to carve womb-to-tomb worlds and the attending to detail to do a mollusc shell that looks like I should be able to start it unfastened and have mussels for dinner. The combination of elements makes the work feel much older and more valued. alternatively of experiencing like modern art. something I am non as fond of. WORKS CITEDâ€Å"Archie Bray Foundation† . hypertext transfer protocol: //www. archiebray. org/residents/Potter/Potter. hypertext markup language. November 7. 2007. â€Å"Biography† . hypertext transfer protocol: //carlampotter. com/bio. htm. November 7. 2007. â€Å"Carla Potter’s Artist Statement† . hypertext transfer protocol: //www. carlampotter. com/statement. htm. November 7. 2007. â€Å"Carla Potter 2006 collection† . hypertext transfer protocol: //www. carlampotter. com/ . November 7. 2007.

Young Adult vs. Middle Grade Fiction Which Are You Writing

Young Adult vs. Middle Grade Fiction Which Are You Writing Young Adult vs. Middle Grade Fiction: Which Are You Writing? Jamie Evans is an editor and writer based in Atlanta. Her passion is young adult and middle grade lit, and she also specializes in romance and new adult fiction. In this post, she reveals 4 key differences between writing for YA and MG readers. Lastly, we arrive at word count. Middle grade fiction will generally be shorter than YA fiction, but again, there are exceptions.As a general idea:Middle grade fiction is generally 30,000–50,000 words (though fantasy can run longer to allow for adequate worldbuilding).Young adult fiction is generally 50,000–75,000 words (with the same note for fantasy).Of course, there are numerous exceptions (hey there, J.K. Rowling!), but as a debut author, this is still your time to be the rule and not the exception. Do you know how long your MG and YA novels should be? By highlighting the basic differences between YA and MG, I hope this serves as a helpful guide as you draft your stories!Jamie Evans is a Reedsy editor who is ready to help you with your manuscript. Share your thoughts and questions in the comments below.

Questions about Gender and Generation Management in the workplace Essay

Questions about Gender and Generation Management in the workplace - Essay Example the organisations achievement of objectives (Bagilhole & White, 2013) It helps in coordinating the various generations in the workplace because all their opinions matter and everyone’s input is valued and incorporated in the firm’s means of achieving the objectives. 2. I would prefer working with generation X due to the fact that it’s a generation made of young people who can make quick decisions and have innovative minds. Their fast decision making tendencies helps in moving the firm forward and achieving the set objectives which increases the value of the firm. Also, the innovative minds helps in coming up with new ways of doing things and processes gives the firm a competitive edge against competitors. 3. Generation Y would be most challenging to manage and lead due to the fact that it is made up of quite older people who are a bit resistant to change. Most of them get stuck with rules and procedures set earlier, and are not willing to change. This makes incorporating valuable changes in an organization difficult; and of course this means that the firm cannot move forward as fast as expected or as planned. 4. The average age for retiring from work is 60. Some of primary reasons as to why people should retire are; it is a state requirement for civil servants to retire, they are no longer as productive as before and also to concentrate on something else they had wished to do. The reasons are individual and others come from external forces like the state requirement for civil servants to retire in order to give way for other qualified citizens to get the chances to work. 5. Generation X is impatient and at the same time dismissive. Most children born during this era display a lot of impatience in most things they undertake in their day to day activities, including undertakings at school, work and even at home. They also dismiss most of the ideas offered by other people mostly the older generation including their parents and other older siblings. On the

Brand analysis report BONDS Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3000 words

Brand analysis report BONDS - Essay Example However, the brand’s decision to sack Australian workers and move operations overseas has negatively affected its brand equity. In order to further enhance its brand equity, BONDS is also required to innovate further the way its competitor aussieBum is. Finally, it needs to further develop and strengthen its brand positioning rather than relying on its heritage. Customers must also be assured that the brand is â€Å"Australian† as the Country-of-Origin and â€Å"Made In† effect can have a huge impact on the brand equity of BONDS. Table of Contents 1.Introduction 3 2.Brand positioning and values 5 3.Brand characteristics 7 4.Customer Benefits 8 5.Brand Communities 9 6.Brand equity 10 8.Reflection 14 1. Introduction BONDS is an underwear brand based in Australia that has become a national icon and has existed for over 98 years. Initially targeted at men’s underwear, the company aims at providing â€Å"shorts, trunks and low rise† underwear (Dugg.com.a u, 2003-2011). Therefore, the main product initially was underwear in a variety of shapes, sizes and colors. Both conventional and contemporary styles are offered by the company to ensure high level of comfort to its customers. The company’s iconic product was The Chesty Bond. Over the years, the company has expanded its product range to including clothing including sportswear and maternity clothing. As of today, BONDS offers not just underwear but clothing for kids, women and babies. As far as the customers of BONDS are concerned, the company focuses on individuals who have a highly active life or work in occupations resulting in high levels of sweating (Dugg.com.au, 2003-2011). Keeping this in mind, the fabric used in the underwear has high absorption capacity that keeps the underwear area dry for long periods of time. (Dugg.com.au, 2003-2011) The elastic bands used on the underwear specifically cater to customers’ need for comfortable fitting and expandability. One of the major competitors of BONDS is aussieBum which produces is underwear in Australia. In 2009, aussieBum’s sales increased by an astounding 40% in the midst of the sacking of Australian workers by BONDS (Stephenson, 2009). The company’s decision to move its operations to China have strengthened the sales of its competitor-aussieBum (Stephenson, 2009). This is because aussieBum’s marketing strategy focuses on highlighting the fact that its products are â€Å"Made in Australia†. Therefore, aussieBum’s recent advertisements that bear the slogan â€Å"Australian made by choice† have capitalized on the loss of customer faith in BONDS after it decided to sack Australian workers (Stephenson, 2009). Another major competitor in Australia is Aldi which is a discount supermarket chain in Australia offering the convenience of online shopping. Aldi’s fairly high geographical distribution in Australia along with a diverse product range makes it a strong competitor for BONDS (Euromonitor International, 2012). Furthermore, local department stores such as Kmart, Target and Myer continue to serve as competitors for BONDS given their own-label brands, low prices and ability to cater to a wide variety of customer segments including women and children. Furthermore, these departmental stores benefit from the high customer traffic from customers who come to shop for everyday use items such as grocery. Therefore, chances are high that customers would prefer to buy underwear and other clothing from these department stores due to the convenience they offer.

Beyond Good and Evil Essay Example for Free

Beyond Good and Evil Essay UPPOSING that Truth is a woman—what then? Is there not ground for suspecting that all philosophers, in so far as they have been dogmatists, have failed to understand women—that the terrible seriousness and clumsy importunity with which they have usually paid their addresses to Truth, have been unskilled and unseemly methods for winning a woman? Certainly she has never allowed herself to be won; and at present every kind of dogma stands with sad and discouraged mien—IF, indeed, it stands at all! For there are scoffers who maintain that it has fallen, that all dogma lies on the ground—nay more, that it is at its last gasp. But to speak seriously, there are good grounds for hoping that all dogmatizing in philosophy, whatever solemn, whatever conclusive and decided airs it has assumed, may have been only a noble puerilism and tyronism; and probably the time is at hand when it will be once and again understood WHAT has actually sufficed for the basis of such imposing and absolute philosophical edifices as the dogmatists have hitherto reared: perhaps some popular superstition of immemorial time (such as the soul-superstition, which, in the form of subject- and ego-superstition, has not yet ceased doing mischief): perhaps some play upon words, a deception on the part of grammar, or an audacious generalization of very restricted, very personal, very human—all-too-human facts. Beyond Good and Evil S The philosophy of the dogmatists, it is to be hoped, was only a promise for thousands of years afterwards, as was astrology in still earlier times, in the service of which probably more labour, gold, acuteness, and patience have been spent than on any actual science hitherto: we owe to it, and to its ‘super- terrestrial’ pretensions in Asia and Egypt, the grand style of architecture. It seems that in order to inscribe themselves upon the heart of humanity with everlasting claims, all great things have first to wander about the earth as enormous and awe- inspiring caricatures: dogmatic philosophy has been a caricature of this kind—for instance, the Vedanta doctrine in Asia, and Platonism in Europe. Let us not be ungrateful to it, although it must certainly be confessed that the worst, the most tiresome, and the most dangerous of errors hitherto has been a dogmatist error—namely, Plato’s invention of Pure Spirit and the Good in Itself. But now when it has been surmounted, when Europe, rid of this nightmare, can again draw breath freely and at least enjoy a healthier—sleep, we, WHOSE DUTY IS WAKEFULNESS ITSELF, are the heirs of all the strength which the struggle against this error has fostered. It amounted to the very inversion of truth, and the denial of the PERSPECTIVE— the fundamental condition—of life, to speak of Spirit and the Good as Plato spoke of them; indeed one might ask, as a physician: ‘How did such a malady attack that finest product of antiquity, Plato? Had the wicked Socrates really corrupted him? Was Socrates after all a corrupter of youths, and deserved his hemlock? ’ But the struggle against Plato, or—to speak plainer, and for the ‘people’—the strugFree eBooks at Planet eBook. com gle against the ecclesiastical oppression of millenniums of Christianity (FOR CHRISITIANITY IS PLATONISM FOR THE ‘PEOPLE’), produced in Europe a magnificent tension of soul, such as had not existed anywhere previously; with such a tensely strained bow one can now aim at the furthest goals. As a matter of fact, the European feels this tension as a state of distress, and twice attempts have been made in grand style to unbend the bow: once by means of Jesuitism, and the second time by means of democratic enlightenment—which, with the aid of liberty of the press and newspaper-reading, might, in fact, bring it about that the spirit would not so easily find itself in ‘distress’! (The Germans invented gunpowder-all credit to them! but they again made things square—they invented printing. ) But we, who are neither Jesuits, nor democrats, nor even sufficiently Germans, we GOOD EUROPEANS, and free, VERY free spirits—we have it still, all the distress of spirit and all the tension of its bow! And perhaps also the arrow, the duty, and, who knows? THE GOAL TO AIM AT†¦. Sils Maria Upper Engadine, JUNE, 1885. Beyond Good and Evil CHAPTER I: PREJUDICES OF PHILOSOPHERS 1. The Will to Truth, which is to tempt us to many a hazardous enterprise, the famous Truthfulness of which all philosophers have hitherto spoken with respect, what questions has this Will to Truth not laid before us! What strange, perplexing, questionable questions! It is already a long story; yet it seems as if it were hardly commenced. Is it any wonder if we at last grow distrustful, lose patience, and turn impatiently away? That this Sphinx teaches us at last to ask questions ourselves? WHO is it really that puts questions to us here? WHAT really is this ‘Will to Truth’ in us? In fact we made a long halt at the question as to the origin of this Will—until at last we came to an absolute standstill before a yet more fundamental question. We inquired about the VALUE of this Will. Granted that we want the truth: WHY NOT RATHER untruth? And uncertainty? Even ignorance? The problem of the value of truth presented itself before us—or was it we who presented ourselves before the problem? Which of us is the Oedipus here? Which the Sphinx? It would seem to be a rendezvous of questions and notes of interrogation. And could it be believed that it at last seems to us as if the problem had never been propounded before, as if we were the first to discern it, get a sight of it, Free eBooks at Planet eBook. com .and RISK RAISING it? For there is risk in raising it, perhaps there is no greater risk. 2. ‘HOW COULD anything originate out of its opposite? For example, truth out of error? or the Will to Truth out of the will to deception? or the generous deed out of selfishness? or the pure sun-bright vision of the wise man out of covetousness? Such genesis is impossible; whoever dreams of it is a fool, nay, worse than a fool; things of the highest value must have a different origin, an origin of THEIR own—in this transitory, seductive, illusory, paltry world, in this turmoil of delusion and cupidity, they cannot have their source. But rather in the lap of Being, in the intransitory, in the concealed God, in the ‘Thing-in-itself— THERE must be their source, and nowhere else! ’ —This mode of reasoning discloses the typical prejudice by which metaphysicians of all times can be recognized, this mode of valuation is at the back of all their logical procedure; through this ‘belief’ of theirs, they exert themselves for their ‘knowledge,’ for something that is in the end solemnly christened ‘the Truth. ’ The fundamental belief of metaphysicians is THE BELIEF IN ANTITHESES OF VALUES. It never occurred even to the wariest of them to doubt here on the very threshold (where doubt, however, was most necessary); though they had made a solemn vow, ‘DE OMNIBUS DUBITANDUM. ’ For it may be doubted, firstly, whether antitheses exist at all; and secondly, whether the popular valuations and antitheses of value upon which metaphysicians have set their seal, are not perhaps merely superficial estimates, merely provi Beyond Good and Evil sional perspectives, besides being probably made from some corner, perhaps from below—‘frog perspectives,’ as it were, to borrow an expression current among painters. In spite of all the value which may belong to the true, the positive, and the unselfish, it might be possible that a higher and more fundamental value for life generally should be assigned to pretence, to the will to delusion, to selfishness, and cupidity. It might even be possible that WHAT constitutes the value of those good and respected things, consists precisely in their being insidiously related, knotted, and crocheted to these evil and apparently opposed things—perhaps even in being essentially identical with them. Perhaps! But who wishes to concern himself with such dangerous ‘Perhapses’! For that investigation one must await the advent of a new order of philosophers, such as will have other tastes and inclinations, the reverse of those hitherto prevalent—philosophers of the dangerous ‘Perhaps’ in every sense of the term. And to speak in all seriousness, I see such new philosophers beginning to appear. 3. Having kept a sharp eye on philosophers, and having read between their lines long enough, I now say to myself that the greater part of conscious thinking must be counted among the instinctive functions, and it is so even in the case of philosophical thinking; one has here to learn anew, as one learned anew about heredity and ‘innateness. ’ As little as the act of birth comes into consideration in the whole process and procedure of heredity, just as little is ‘being-conscious’ OPPOSED to the instinctive in any decisive Free eBooks at Planet eBook. com sense; the greater part of the conscious thinking of a philosopher is secretly influenced by his instincts, and forced into definite channels. And behind all logic and its seeming sovereignty of movement, there are valuations, or to speak more plainly, physiological demands, for the maintenance of a definite mode of life For example, that the certain is worth more than the uncertain, that illusion is less valuable than ‘truth’ such valuations, in spite of their regulative importance for US, might notwithstanding be only superficial valuations, special kinds of maiserie, such as may be necessary for the maintenance of beings such as ourselves. Supposing, in effect, that man is not just the ‘measure of things. ’ 4. The falseness of an opinion is not for us any objection to it: it is here, perhaps, that our new language sounds most strangely. The question is, how far an opinion is lifefurthering, life- preserving, species-preserving, perhaps species-rearing, and we are fundamentally inclined to maintain that the falsest opinions (to which the synthetic judgments a priori belong), are the most indispensable to us, that without a recognition of logical fictions, without a comparison of reality with the purely IMAGINED world of the absolute and immutable, without a constant counterfeiting of the world by means of numbers, man could not live—that the renunciation of false opinions would be a renunciation of life, a negation of life. TO RECOGNISE UNTRUTH AS A CONDITION OF LIFE; that is certainly to impugn the traditional ideas of value in a dangerous manner, and a phi Beyond Good and Evil losophy which ventures to do so, has thereby alone placed itself beyond good and evil. 5. That which causes philosophers to be regarded halfdistrustfully and half-mockingly, is not the oft-repeated discovery how innocent they are—how often and easily they make mistakes and lose their way, in short, how childish and childlike they are,—but that there is not enough honest dealing with them, whereas they all raise a loud and virtuous outcry when the problem of truthfulness is even hinted at in the remotest manner. They all pose as though their real opinions had been discovered and attained through the self-evolving of a cold, pure, divinely indifferent dialectic (in contrast to all sorts of mystics, who, fairer and foolisher, talk of ‘inspiration’), whereas, in fact, a prejudiced proposition, idea, or ‘suggestion,’ which is generally their heart’s desire abstracted and refined, is defended by them with arguments sought out after the event. They are all advocates who do not wish to be regarded as such, generally astute defenders, also, of their prejudices, which they dub ‘truths,’— and VERY far from having the conscience which bravely admits this to itself, very far from having the good taste of the courage which goes so far as to let this be understood, perhaps to warn friend or foe, or in cheerful confidence and self-ridicule. The spectacle of the Tartuffery of old Kant, equally stiff and decent, with which he entices us into the dialectic by-ways that lead (more correctly mislead) to his ‘categorical imperative’— makes us fastidious ones smile, we who find no small amusement in spying out Free eBooks at Planet eBook. com the subtle tricks of old moralists and ethical preachers. Or, still more so, the hocus-pocus in mathematical form, by means of which Spinoza has, as it were, clad his philosophy in mail and mask—in fact, the ‘love of HIS wisdom,’ to translate the term fairly and squarely—in order thereby to strike terror at once into the heart of the assailant who should dare to cast a glance on that invincible maiden, that Pallas Athene:—how much of personal timidity and vulnerability does this masquerade of a sickly recluse betray! 6. It has gradually become clear to me what every great philosophy up till now has consisted of—namely, the confession of its originator, and a species of involuntary and unconscious auto-biography; and moreover that the moral (or immoral) purpose in every philosophy has constituted the true vital germ out of which the entire plant has always grown. Indeed, to understand how the abstrusest metaphysical assertions of a philosopher have been arrived at, it is always well (and wise) to first ask oneself: ‘What morality do they (or does he) aim at? ’ Accordingly, I do not believe that an ‘impulse to knowledge’ is the father of philosophy; but that another impulse, here as elsewhere, has only made use of knowledge (and mistaken knowledge! ) as an instrument. But whoever considers the fundamental impulses of man with a view to determining how far they may have here acted as INSPIRING GENII (or as demons and cobolds), will find that they have all practiced philosophy at one time or another, and that each one of them would have been only too glad to look upon itself as the ultimate end of existence 10 Beyond Good and Evil and the legitimate LORD over all the other impulses. For every impulse is imperious, and as SUCH, attempts to philosophize. To be sure, in the case of scholars, in the case of really scientific men, it may be otherwise—‘better,’ if you will; there there may really be such a thing as an ‘impulse to knowledge,’ some kind of small, independent clock-work, which, when well wound up, works away industriously to that end, WITHOUT the rest of the scholarly impulses taking any material part therein. The actual ‘interests’ of the scholar, therefore, are generally in quite another direction— in the family, perhaps, or in money-making, or in politics; it is, in fact, almost indifferent at what point of research his little machine is placed, and whether the hopeful young worker becomes a good philologist, a mushroom specialist, or a chemist; he is not CHARACTERISED by becoming this or that. In the philosopher, on the contrary, there is absolutely nothing impersonal; and above all, his morality furnishes a decided and decisive testimony as to WHO HE IS,—that is to say, in what order the deepest impulses of his nature stand to each other. 7. How malicious philosophers can be! I know of nothing more stinging than the joke Epicurus took the liberty of making on Plato and the Platonists; he called them Dionysiokolakes. In its original sense, and on the face of it, the word signifies ‘Flatterers of Dionysius’—consequently, tyrants’ accessories and lick-spittles; besides this, however, it is as much as to say, ‘They are all ACTORS, there is nothing genuine about them’ (for Dionysiokolax was a popular Free eBooks at Planet eBook. com 11 name for an actor). And the latter is really the malignant reproach that Epicurus cast upon Plato: he was annoyed by the grandiose manner, the mise en scene style of which Plato and his scholars were masters—of which Epicurus was not a master! He, the old school-teacher of Samos, who sat concealed in his little garden at Athens, and wrote three hundred books, perhaps out of rage and ambitious envy of Plato, who knows! Greece took a hundred years to find out who the garden-god Epicurus really was. Did she ever find out? 8. There is a point in every philosophy at which the ‘conviction’ of the philosopher appears on the scene; or, to put it in the words of an ancient mystery: Adventavit asinus, Pulcher et fortissimus. 9. You desire to LIVE ‘according to Nature’? Oh, you noble Stoics, what fraud of words! Imagine to yourselves a being like Nature, boundlessly extravagant, boundlessly indifferent, without purpose or consideration, without pity or justice, at once fruitful and barren and uncertain: imagine to yourselves INDIFFERENCE as a power—how COULD you live in accordance with such indifference? To live—is not that just endeavouring to be otherwise than this Nature? Is not living valuing, preferring, being unjust, being limited, endeavouring to be different? And granted that your imperative, ‘living according to Nature,’ means actu1 Beyond Good and Evil ally the same as ‘living according to life’—how could you do DIFFERENTLY? Why should you make a principle out of what you yourselves are, and must be? In reality, however, it is quite otherwise with you: while you pretend to read with rapture the canon of your law in Nature, you want something quite the contrary, you extraordinary stage-players and self-deluders! In your pride you wish to dictate your morals and ideals to Nature, to Nature herself, and to incorporate them therein; you insist that it shall be Nature ‘according to the Stoa,’ and would like everything to be made after your own image, as a vast, eternal glorification and generalism of Stoicism! With all your love for truth, you have forced yourselves so long, so persistently, and with such hypnotic rigidity to see Nature FALSELY, that is to say, Stoically, that you are no longer able to see it otherwise— and to crown all, some unfathomable superciliousness gives you the Bedlamite hope that BECAUSE you are able to tyrannize over yourselves—Stoicism is self-tyranny—Nature will also allow herself to be tyrannized over: is not the Stoic a PART of Nature? †¦ But this is an old and everlasting story: what happened in old times with the Stoics still happens today, as soon as ever a philosophy begins to believe in itself. It always creates the world in its own image; it cannot do otherwise; philosophy is this tyrannical impulse itself, the most spiritual Will to Power, the will to ‘creation of the world,’ the will to the causa prima. 10. The eagerness and subtlety, I should even say craftiness, with which the problem of ‘the real and the apparent world’ Free eBooks at Planet eBook. com 1 is dealt with at present throughout Europe, furnishes food for thought and attention; and he who hears only a ‘Will to Truth’ in the background, and nothing else, cannot certainly boast of the sharpest ears. In rare and isolated cases, it may really have happened that such a Will to Truth—a certain extravagant and adventurous pluck, a metaphysician’s ambition of the forlorn hope—has participated therein: that which in the end always prefers a handful of ‘certainty’ to a whole cartload of beautiful possibilities; there may even be puritanical fanatics of conscience, who prefer to put their last trust in a sure nothing, rather than in an uncertain something. But that is Nihilism, and the sign of a despairing, mortally wearied soul, notwithstanding the courageous bearing such a virtue may display. It seems, however, to be otherwise with stronger and livelier thinkers who are still eager for life. In that they side AGAINST appearance, and speak superciliously of ‘perspective,’ in that they rank the credibility of their own bodies about as low as the credibility of the ocular evidence that ‘the earth stands still,’ and thus, apparently, allowing with complacency their securest possession to escape (for what does one at present believe in more firmly than in one’s body? ),—who knows if they are not really trying to win back something which was formerly an even securer possession, something of the old domain of the faith of former times, perhaps the ‘immortal soul,’ perhaps ‘the old God,’ in short, ideas by which they could live better, that is to say, more vigorously and more joyously, than by ‘modern ideas’? There is DISTRUST of these modern ideas in this mode of looking at things, a 1 Beyond Good and Evil disbelief in all that has been constructed yesterday and today; there is perhaps some slight admixture of satiety and scorn, which can no longer endure the BRIC-A-BRAC of ideas of the most varied origin, such as so-called Positivism at present throws on the market; a disgust of the more refined taste at the village-fair motleyness and patchiness of all these reality-philosophasters, in whom there is nothing either new or true, except this motleyness. Therein it seems to me that we should agree with those skeptical anti-realists and knowledge-microscopists of the present day; their instinct, which repels them from MODERN reality, is unrefuted †¦ what do their retrograde by-paths concern us! The main thing about them is NOT that they wish to go ‘back,’ but that they wish to get AWAY therefrom. A little MORE strength, swing, courage, and artistic power, and they would be OFF—and not back! 11. It seems to me that there is everywhere an attempt at present to divert attention from the actual influence which Kant exercised on German philosophy, and especially to ignore prudently the value which he set upon himself. Kant was first and foremost proud of his Table of Categories; with it in his hand he said: ‘This is the most difficult thing that could ever be undertaken on behalf of metaphysics. ’ Let us only understand this ‘could be’! He was proud of having DISCOVERED a new faculty in man, the faculty of synthetic judgment a priori. Granting that he deceived himself in this matter; the development and rapid flourishing of German philosophy depended nevertheless on his pride, and on the Free eBooks at Planet eBook. com 1 eager rivalry of the younger generation to discover if possible something—at all events ‘new faculties’—of which to be still prouder! —But let us reflect for a moment—it is high time to do so. ‘How are synthetic judgments a priori POSSIBLE? ’ Kant asks himself—and what is really his answer? ‘BY MEANS OF A MEANS (faculty)’—but unfortunately not in five words, but so circumstantially, imposingly, and with such display of German profundity and verbal flourishes, that one altogether loses sight of the comical niaiserie allemande involved in such an answer. People were beside themselves with delight over this new faculty, and the jubilation reached its climax when Kant further discovered a moral faculty in man—for at that time Germans were still moral, not yet dabbling in the ‘Politics of hard fact. ’ Then came the honeymoon of German philosophy. All the young theologians of the Tubingen institution went immediately into the groves—all seeking for ‘faculties. ’ And what did they not find—in that innocent, rich, and still youthful period of the German spirit, to which Romanticism, the malicious fairy, piped and sang, when one could not yet distinguish between ‘finding’ and ‘inventing’! Above all a faculty for the ‘transcendental†; Schelling christened it, intellectual intuition, and thereby gratified the most earnest longings of the naturally pious-inclined Germans. One can do no greater wrong to the whole of this exuberant and eccentric movement (which was really youthfulness, notwithstanding that it disguised itself so boldly, in hoary and senile conceptions), than to take it seriously, or even treat it with moral indignation. Enough, however—the world 1 Beyond Good and Evil grew older, and the dream vanished. A time came when people rubbed their foreheads, and they still rub them today. People had been dreaming, and first and foremost—old Kant. ‘By means of a means (faculty)’—he had said, or at least meant to say. But, is that—an answer? An explanation? Or is it not rather merely a repetition of the question? How does opium induce sleep? ‘By means of a means (faculty), ‘namely the virtus dormitiva, replies the doctor in Moliere, Quia est in eo virtus dormitiva, Cujus est natura sensus assoupire. But such replies belong to the realm of comedy, and it is high time to replace the Kantian question, ‘How are synthetic judgments a PRIORI possible? ’ by another question, ‘Why is belief in such judgments necessary? ’—in effect, it is high time that we should understand that such judgments must be believed to be true, for the sake of the preservation of creatures like ourselves; though they still might naturally be false judgments! Or, more plainly spoken, and roughly and readily—synthetic judgments a priori should not ‘be possible’ at all; we have no right to them; in our mouths they are nothing but false judgments. Only, of course, the belief in their truth is necessary, as plausible belief and ocular evidence belonging to the perspective view of life. And finally, to call to mind the enormous influence which ‘German philosophy’—I hope you understand its right to inverted commas (goosefeet)? —has Free eBooks at Planet eBook. com 1 exercised throughout the whole of Europe, there is no doubt that a certain VIRTUS DORMITIVA had a share in it; thanks to German philosophy, it was a delight to the noble idlers, the virtuous, the mystics, the artiste, the three-fourths Christians, and the political obscurantists of all nations, to find an antidote to the still overwhelming sensualism which overflowed from the last century into this, in short—‘sensus assoupire. ’ †¦ 12. As regards materialistic atomism, it is one of the best- refuted theories that have been advanced, and in Europe there is now perhaps no one in the learned world so unscholarly as to attach serious signification to it, except for convenient everyday use (as an abbreviation of the means of expression)— thanks chiefly to the Pole Boscovich: he and the Pole Copernicus have hitherto been the greatest and most successful opponents of ocular evidence. For while Copernicus has persuaded us to believe, contrary to all the senses, that the earth does NOT stand fast, Boscovich has taught us to abjure the belief in the last thing that ‘stood fast’ of the earth—the belief in ‘substance,’ in ‘matter,’ in the earth-residuum, and particle- atom: it is the greatest triumph over the senses that has hitherto been gained on earth. One must, however, go still further, and also declare war, relentless war to the knife, against the ‘atomistic requirements’ which still lead a dangerous after-life in places where no one suspects them, like the more celebrated ‘metaphysical requirements†: one must also above all give the finishing stroke to that other and more portentous atomism which Christianity has 1 Beyond Good and Evil taught best and longest, the SOUL- ATOMISM. Let it be permitted to designate by this expression the belief which regards the soul as something indestructible, eternal, indivisible, as a monad, as an atomon: this belief ought to be expelled from science! Between ourselves, it is not at all necessary to get rid of ‘the soul’ thereby, and thus renounce one of the oldest and most venerated hypotheses—as happens frequently to the clumsiness of naturalists, who can hardly touch on the soul without immediately losing it. But the way is open for new acceptations and refinements of the soul-hypothesis; and such conceptions as ‘mortal soul,’ and ‘soul of subjective multiplicity,’ and ‘soul as social structure of the instincts and passions,’ want henceforth to have legitimate rights in science. In that the NEW psychologist is about to put an end to the superstitions which have hitherto flourished with almost tropical luxuriance around the idea of the soul, he is really, as it were, thrusting himself into a new desert and a new distrust—it is possible that the older psychologists had a merrier and more comfortable time of it; eventually, however, he finds that precisely thereby he is also condemned to INVENT—and, who knows? perhaps to DISCOVER the new. 13. Psychologists should bethink themselves before putting down the instinct of self-preservation as the cardinal instinct of an organic being. A living thing seeks above all to DISCHARGE its strength—life itself is WILL TO POWER; self-preservation is only one of the indirect and most frequent RESULTS thereof. In short, here, as everywhere else, Free eBooks at Planet eBook. com 1 let us beware of SUPERFLUOUS teleological principles! — one of which is the instinct of self- preservation (we owe it to Spinoza’s inconsistency). It is thus, in effect, that method ordains, which must be essentially economy of principles. 14. It is perhaps just dawning on five or six minds that natural philosophy is only a world-exposition and worldarrangement (according to us, if I may say so! ) and NOT a world-explanation; but in so far as it is based on belief in the senses, it is regarded as more, and for a long time to come must be regarded as more—namely, as an explanation. It has eyes and fingers of its own, it has ocular evidence and palpableness of its own: this operates fascinatingly, persuasively, and CONVINCINGLY upon an age with fundamentally plebeian tastes—in fact, it follows instinctively the canon of truth of eternal popular sensualism. What is clear, what is ‘explained’? Only that which can be seen and felt—one must pursue every problem thus far. Obversely, however, the charm of the Platonic mode of thought, which was an ARISTOCRATIC mode, consisted precisely in RESISTANCE to obvious sense-evidence—perhaps among men who enjoyed even stronger and more fastidious senses than our contemporaries, but who knew how to find a higher triumph in remaining masters of them: and this by means of pale, cold, grey conceptional networks which they threw over the motley whirl of the senses—the mob of the senses, as Plato said. In this overcoming of the world, and interpreting of the world in the manner of Plato, there was an ENJOYMENT different from that which the physicists 0 Beyond Good and Evil of today offer us—and likewise the Darwinists and antiteleologists among the physiological workers, with their principle of the ‘smallest possible effort,’ and the greatest possible blunder. ‘Where there is nothing more to see or to grasp, there is also nothing more for men to do’—that is certainly an imperative different from the Platonic one, but it may notwithstanding be the right imperative for a hardy, laborious race of machinists and bridge- builders of the future, who have nothing but ROUGH work to perform. 15. To study physiology with a clear conscience, one must insist on the fact that the sense-organs are not phenomena in the sense of the idealistic philosophy; as such they certainly could not be causes! Sensualism, therefore, at least as regulative hypothesis, if not as heuristic principle. What? And others say even that the external world is the work of our organs? But then our body, as a part of this external world, would be the work of our organs! But then our organs themselves would be the work of our organs! It seems to me that this is a complete REDUCTIO AD ABSURDUM, if the conception CAUSA SUI is something fundamentally absurd. Consequently, the external world is NOT the work of our organs—? 16. There are still harmless self-observers who believe that there are ‘immediate certainties†; for instance, ‘I think,’ or as the superstition of Schopenhauer puts it, ‘I will†; as though cognition here got hold of its object purely and simply as ‘the thing in itself,’ without any falsification taking place eiFree eBooks at Planet eBook. com 1 ther on the part of the subject or the object. I would repeat it, however, a hundred times, that ‘immediate certainty,’ as well as ‘absolute knowledge’ and the ‘thing in itself,’ involve a CONTRADICTIO IN ADJECTO; we really ought to free ourselves from the misleading significance of words! The people on their part may think that cognition is knowing all about things, but the philosopher must say to himself: ‘When I analyze the process that is expressed in the sentence, ‘I think,’ I find a whole series of daring assertions, the argumentative proof of which would be difficult, perhaps impossible: for instance, that it is I who think, that there must necessarily be something that thinks, that thinking is an activity and operation on the part of a being who is thought of as a cause, that there is an ‘ego,’ and finally, that it is already determined what is to be designated by thinking—that I KNOW what thinking is. For if I had not already decided within myself what it is, by what standard could I determine whether that which is just happening is not perhaps ‘willing’ or ‘feeling’?

Essay --

Faith healing is an unbelievable phenomenon where diseases and medical conditions are cured solely through spiritual means. First demonstrated by Jesus Christ, many modern day faith healers claim they can heal any disease and offer their services as an alternative to modern-day medical treatment. There have been many displays of this faith healing over the years, but it’s a controversial topic that has many people for and against. There are many self professed faith healers in the world today. Some of them are famous and ridiculously rich, some are the opposite, but they all claim to have some sort of supernatural power capable of healing through faith alone. It’s the exact opposite of medical treatment and is hard to prove, but cases of cures are being reported often. For example, the Healing Rooms Ministry of Bethel Church in Redding, California have pages of testimonials of people claiming to be healed of things such as broken bones and cancer. But how is it possible to know whether these stories have been fabricated or not? How is it possible to know to what extent the faith healing actually had an effect on the cure. It isn’t possible. What often happens in these faith healing situations is what is called the placebo effect. People go into it expecting to be cured, and may end up no longer feeling the effects of their disease after being â€Å"healed†. The problem with this is the fallacial reasoning, whereby the participant affirms the consequent and also gets caught up in a post hoc, ergo propter hoc. The participant uses the faith healing method, and then if they get better they will assume that it was because of the faith healing and not any natural process or other medical treatment they may have received. There are many log... .... Putting the beliefs behind it aside, though, many groups and organisations have offered cash incentives for cured victims of particular faith healers to publicly come forward, but no-one ever has. Furthermore, previously mentioned James Randi has had a cash prize of one million dollars for anyone who can prove that they have supernatural powers to him. He has been offering this award for many years, but has not needed to pay up even once to date. Faith healing is something that many people have experienced, through themselves or a loved one, and some will speak only good of it, but many will argue the opposite. Despite the relatively large number of positive testimonials, faith healers have a bad track record, and as much as it would be nice for it to be at least somewhat reasonable, there is no solid or scientific evidence whatsoever to suggest that is the case.

Corporal Punishment and the Damages of Spanking on Children

?CORPORAL PUNISHMENT AND THE DAMAGES OF SPANKING ON CHILDREN You have probably heard the expression, â€Å"spare the rod, and spoil the child. † Do you agree with it? Perhaps you were spanked as a kid. Was it appropriate? Some people see spanking as an outdated method of punishment or even child abuse, while others view a swat on the bottom as a parent's prerogative. People differ a lot on their views when it comes to administering corporal punishment on children. While some view it as being barbaric, some consider those who spare the rod and spoil the child to be sloppy in their tutorage of children. The basis for taking an exemption to the administration of corporal punishment on children might stem from legal, educational, medical, communal and even economic reasons. Where do we draw the line when it comes to disciplining our children? When considering if the administration of corporal punishment is good or wrong, some questions have to be initially answered. What can be referred to as corporal punishment? What precipitates corporal punishment? What effects can corporal punishment accomplished? Is the practice healthy in all and any ramifications? Are there noticeable differences in the lives of adults that were/were not subjected to corporal punishments? Based on these, should the practice be discouraged or continued? If these questions are successfully answered without bias or prejudice, the issue of if or if not corporal punishment administration on children will be laid to rest. Corporal punishment is the intentional infliction of pain on the human body for purposes of punishment or controlling behavior. It includes slapping, spanking, and forcing to stand for long periods of time; spanking involves hitting with the palm of the hand. Children often undergo some form of corporal punishment in response to punishment for flouting of rules, regulations or norms, failing grades, exhibition of unwholesome traits and so on. Quite agreeably, corporal punishments might have succeeded in curbing the delinquencies of juveniles in some cases. However, the effects are definitely short lived and results often in astronomical failures! Obedience to an authority out of love and respect is more sustainable as compared to obedience evoke from fear and dominion. It common situations in homes that children often tend to do what is not expected of them to do if there is an element of risk involved (corporal punishment and spanking in this case). If a parent patiently explains why using of a particular brand of drug might be helpful, the child respectfully obeys; however, in cases where threats are issued, intriguing human nature sets in and the rule is disobeyed! If restrictions are placed on the freedom of children without issuance of threats and physical abuse, but lovingness, patience and kindness is expended, the tendency to disobey is greatly reduced. Research have shown that people that end up being serial killers, rapist, drug dependents and who involve in all social vices are most times, the victims of physical abuse brought about by spanking (Gershoff , 2002). Children and people in general that are subjected to corporal punishment lack or have reduced empathy and human compassion for other people (Lopez, Bonenberger, & Schneider, 2001). Any effect of corporal punishment is negative (American Academy of Pediatrics, 1998; Lytton, 1997; J. McCord, 1997; Straus, 1994a). Those who do not become bullies end up being timid and insipid people that have no control over their own minds. Such people do not know what it means to be loved, have self respect and to respect others. The only way they can communicate love is via pain and suffering (at least that is the way they were brought up), and that good and lessons can only be learnt or achieved through hardship, pain and suffering. As adults, they become the inflictor of pain because they have always being the recipient (Gershoff & Bitensky, 2007). Furthermore, parents that practice corporal punishment are often times victims of corporal punishment when they were children. Why should the hate cycle continue? Being spanked is an emotional event. Adults often remember with crystal clarity times they were paddled or spanked as children. Many adults look back on corporal punishment in childhood with great anger and sadness. Sometimes people say, â€Å"I was spanked as a child, and I deserved it. † It is hard for us to believe that people who loved us would intentionally hurt us. We feel the need to excuse that hurt. Spanking often leave bruises, marks and wounds which sometimes may never heal or leave it trails. Medically, this is unacceptable. Bearing marks of manhandling often times results in emotion mess and immaturity, sporadic acts of wickedness, cowardice and lack of self assurance. Peers of children who are being spanked often tease and bully such. They cannot concentrate on their education both in school and at home. Adult survivors of abuse are subject to a substantial array of long term effects of their abuse. In Cruz and Essen (1994) a variety of effects are suggested including emotional roblems, behavioral problems, physical problems, sexual dysfunction problems and social problems. Psychological abuse of children has been described as the most ambiguous to define and yet maybe the most common type of abuse to be inflicted on children by parents. Legally, children have rights under the international human rights charter that are often contravened with the administration of corporal punishments. Can those who carry out corporal punishment set their actions within the confines of the law? Most sadly, no! Studies show that even a few instances of being hit as children are associated with more depressive symptoms as adults (Strauss, 1994, Strassberg, Dodge, Pettit & Bates, 1994). A landmark meta-analysis of 88 corporal punishment research studies of over six decades showed that corporal punishment of children was associated with negative outcomes including increased delinquent and antisocial behavior, increased risk of child abuse and spousal abuse, increased risk of child aggression and adult aggression, decreased child mental health and decreased adult mental health (Gershoff, 2002). While most of us who were spanked turned out OK, it is likely that not being spanked would have helped us turn out to be healthier. It is important to note that corporal punishment is not the only form of correcting undesirable traits in children (Day and Roberts, 1983; Roberts and Powell, 1990). Often times, parent/guardian and children relationship are at best frosty when incidences of child spanking and corporal punishment are melted out. Love and respect fosters better relationship and communal existence, than fear and domination, which is the product of spanking. Children find it easier to deal with daily problems in a mature manner, and they grow up to be responsible and law abiding adults. Even in most species of animals, biting and kicking is absent between offspring and parents, yet communion in such class is excellent; obedience to the call of a parent, following hierarchy and abiding within existing norms and social standings are respected. Should not human parents show some intelligence superior to animal parents? The society has nothing to lose and everything to gain if spanking is abolished. In the absence of corporal punishment, the society thrives happily on the reduction in crimes of juveniles, adult sociopaths and other child abuse related problems. Also, it makes the society saner and more civilized. For instance, children that are continually subjected to corporal punishment see no issue with picking up a fight, being bullies and destructive agents. They often seek companionship with people of their like minds, resulting in the proliferation of delinquent gangs, whose sole end results are vices such as drugs dealing, rape, stealing and robbery, wanton destruction and creating public unrest. An end to spanking and corporal punishment will see an end to a lot of the unnecessary evil crimes being perpetuated in our society. REFERENCES American Academy of Pediatrics. (1998). Guidance for effective discipline. Pediatrics, 101, 723–728. Day, D. E. , & Roberts, M. W. (1983). An analysis of the physical punishment component of a parent-training program. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 11, 141–152. Gershoff, E. T. (2002). Corporal Punishments by parents and Associated Child Behaviors and Experiences: A Meta-Analytic and Theoretical Review. The American Psychological Association. Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 128, No. 4, 539-579. Gershoff, E. T & Bitensky, S. H. (2007). The Case against the Corporal Punishment of Children: Converging Evidence from Social Science Research and International Human Rights Law and Implications for U. S. Public Policy. The American Psychological Association. Psychological, Public Policy and Law. Vol. 13, No. 4, 231-272. Lopez, N. L. , Bonenberger, J. L. , & Schneider, H. G. (2001). Parental disciplinary history, current levels of empathy, and moral reasoning in young adults. North American Journal of Psychology, 3, 193–204. Lytton, H. (1997). Physical punishment is a problem, whether conduct disorder is endogenous or not. Psychological Inquiry, 8, 211–214. McCord, J. (1997). On discipline. Psychological Inquiry, 8, 215–217. Roberts, M. W. , & Powers, S. W. (1990). Adjusting chair timeout enforcement procedures for oppositional children. Behavior Therapy, 21, 257–271. Straus, M. A. (1994a). Beating the devil out of them: Corporal punishment in American families. New York: Lexington Books.

Warhol: the Flatness of Fame

THANK YOU all for being here this brisk March afternoon. I’d like to thank the GRAM for the invitation to speak in conjunction with such a wonderful exhibition, and especially Jean Boot for all of her diligent coordination on my behalf. (There are 3 parts to my presentation. First, a virtual tutorial on the process of screen-printing; secondly, a discussion of the formal and conceptual potential inherent to printmaking, and the way in which Warhol expertly exploited that potential. Finally, I will conclude with an actual demonstration of screen-printing in the Museum’s basement studio. In coming weeks, you’ll have an opportunity to hear much more about the cultural-historical context for Andy Warhol’s work from two exceptional area scholars, beginning next Friday evening with a lecture by my colleague at GV, Dr. Kirsten Strom, and on _______ Susan Eberle of Kendall College of Art & Design. As Jean indicated in her introduction, I teach drawing and printmak ing at GVSU. In other words, I’m approaching Warhol’s work very much as a studio artist. As a printmaker in particular, I’m predisposed to note the large degree (great extent? to which the innate characteristics of the medium – in this case screen-printing – enable and inform the meaning of Warhol’s work. At the outset of each printmaking course I teach at Grand Valley, I provide students a brief overview of the social history of the print; I divulge its rich heritage in the service of dispensing and preserving our (collected cultural discourse, from†¦) verbal and pictorial languages, knowledge and history, cultural discourse, from ancient scripture to textile design to political critique. In addition I cite the formal qualities specific to the print – multiplicity, mutability, and its recombinant capabilities. I open with this background as a means of framing the work students will produce in the course. I’d like to provide a similar overview here, as a means of framing the work of Warhol, which is so richly informed by the native characteristics of his processes. As the expression goes: the medium is the message; form and content are inseparable. First I offer a brief tutorial on the process of screen-print, in the hopes of providing a bit of context and a richer appreciation for the images/discussion to follow. â€Å"With silk-screening, you pick a photograph, blow it up, transfer it in glue onto silk, and then roll ink across so that the ink goes through the silk but not through the glue. †) The Imagery Warhol screen-printed images onto canvas in the early 1960s, and he began simultaneously to translate this technique to printing on paper. His subjects related directly to his paintings of the same period: James Cagney, the Race Riots, and Ambulance Disasters. These works on paper were printed in monochromatic tones and screened in a method that retained the graininess and immediacy of the mass media images on which they were based. Warhol considered these works to be unique drawings. Changes in the ink saturation and/or in the composition during the printing process created variations in each work. Screen-printing was ideally suited to Warhol in two distinct ways: First – technically, it allows him to harvest images from a vast bounty of sources. Secondly – he fittingly adapted a â€Å"low culture†, commercial process for the production of images chronicling life in celebrity-crazed, consumer-driven, Post-War America. One of the well-known strategies of Pop Artists – Warhol and Lichtenstein, among them – was their appropriation of the visual characteristics of mechanical reproduction (which you can see clearly here in Lichtenstein’s Ben Day dots pattern. Warhol went further than borrowing the language, employing the means of commercial printing itself. As of the 1930s, screen-printing was a widely-practiced process for the printing of posters, t-shirts, and other graphics in the US. In other words, Warhol chose this medium for its associations with the culture of advertising and shopping/consumerism. I want everybody to think alike. Russia is doing it under government. It’s happening here all by itself. I don’t think art should be only for the select few. I think it should be for the mass of American people. † But how exactly does one represent â€Å"the mass of American people†? Through it’s proxies: (A) Through the objects of its consumption : Campbell’s cans, Coke bottles, Brillo pads and Mobil Gas (B) Through the media icons it reveres, and (C) Through the images of anonymous tragic figures Disaster and death were not his primary concerns, but rather the anonymous victims of history – the masses. D and D evoke this mass subject, for in a society of spectacle this subject often appears only in stories and images of mass death. â€Å"I want to be a machine†: The History of the Print as a means/tool for social and political critique) Although screen-printing as Warhol practiced it is primarily a 20th century advent, the tradition of the print as a vehicle for disseminating ideas and information (as the vox populi) is centuries old. Among the earliest surviving printed artifacts in Western civilization are these two contradictory images: a Holy Picture on the left, and playing cards on the right. Each dates from the mid-15th century, each is the product of the same â€Å"technological innovation†, the wood block (and in the eyes of the Catholic church, working at cross purposes with one another! ) Many of the most widely reproduced and well-known prints in the Western world are images of cultural unrest and political and social critique. These are a few examples: Francisco Goya, 18th C Spanish printmaker William Hogarth, 18th C English printmaker Honore Daumier, 19th C French printmaker Kathe Kollwitz, early 20th C German printmaker Jose Guadalupe Posada, late 19th C Mexican printmaker â€Å"All of what I have to say is right there on the surface – Remarks such as this one are at times misconstrued as superficiality – a dismissal of content – suggesting to some that Warhol’s choice of imagery was indiscriminate. Especially today, Warhol is often mischaracterized through his studied, stoic affect – as an artist who felt nothing more for his work than for the contents of his local grocery store. I would argue that Warhol’s imagery is anything but indiscriminate, and is instead engaged in the popular tradition/rich heritage of the print as a means of social and political critique, especially obvious in the years between 1962 and 1980, from the â€Å"Death and Dying† series to the â€Å"Endangered Species† series. (Over this prolific period, Warhol’s ouvre included references to the Civil Rights movement, the death penalty, and of course the Cold War. Even the artists’ early celebrity portraits are shrouded with both private and public tragedy: Marilyn, Elvis, Liz Taylor, JFK and Jackie O†¦ ) To me, Warhol’s deadpan cynicism has always seemed a calculated critique of the turbulent social and political climate. It’s an ironic persona reflected in his works – an expression of apathy intended to induce the appropriate response from his viewers: shock and bewilderment that any artist, could produce images of graphic violence and human trauma with such apparent passivity. Multiplicity – The first of three formal qualities innate to printmaking â€Å"I like boring things. † â€Å"I don’t want it to be essentially the same – I want it to be exactly the same. Because the more you look at the same exact thing, the more the meaning goes away and the better and emptier you feel. † Such statements suggest a strategic, pre-emptive embrace of the very compulsive repetition that a consumerist society demands of us all. If you can’t beat it, Warhol implies, join it. More: if you enter it totally, you might expose it; you might reveal its enforced automatism through your own excessive example. These remarks reposition the role of repetition in Warhol. Here repetition is both a draining of significance and a defending against effect. This is one function of repetition in our psychic lives: we recall traumatic events in order to place them into a psychic economy. Yet the Warhol repetitions are not restorative in this way; they are not about a neutralization of trauma, for his repetitions not only reproduce traumatic effects, but sometimes produce them as well. Repetition in Warhol is neither a simple representation of the world nor a superficial image. His repetition serves to filter traumatic reality, but it does so in a way that points to this reality nonetheless. Ultimately I would suggest that Warhol’s use of the multiple functions as a form of potent cultural critique, whether it emphasizes the horror, or whether it desensitizes us to the violence in many of his images. Mutability – (â€Å"With silk-screening, you pick a photograph, blow it up, transfer it in glue onto silk, and then roll ink across so that the ink goes through the silk but not through the glue. That way you get the same image, slightly different each time. It was all so simple – quick and chancy. I was thrilled with it. †) The screen-printing technique affords artists the latitude for simple yet dramatic changes, from impression to impression. With little trouble, one can shift color, and even scale. The image can be altered through adjustments to the matrix (or stencil, in this case), or during the printing process itself, through the irregular application of ink. When I originally conceived of this talk, I intended to speak primarily to this one formal aspect of Warhol’s prints: his exploitation of the process to produce deliberate imperfections that (reflect the true disposition of his subjects) (inform the meaning behind his images. ) (further enable the content of his work. ) contribute to the flatness of his subjects – thus emphasizing their artificiality. Purposefully crude printing and mis-registration disrupt the pictorial illusion, drawing attention to the flatness of each image that, in a metaphorical sense, speaks to the nature of fame. Warhol’s arbitrary colors suggest the un-reality and artifice of each subject. These aren’t real people, but products, and you can have them anyway you want them. We construct reality the way we desire it to be – the lips are larger, more red, the hair is more golden; they remain young and beautiful forever. Marilyn image that disintegrates and fades out. Elvis that overlaps. – (silver screen/motion Recombinant Potential – The screenprint is among the most versatile of print techniques in regards to substrate. In other words, one can print on a diverse array of surfaces, including paper, wood, glass, plastics, textiles. The exhibition here at the GRAM demonstrates Warhol’s affinity for the aesthetic of the print on canvas – a practice that effectively elevated screen-print – a low-art technology of commerce – to the privileged status of painting. Their visual translation into the language of screen-printing homogenizes every subject; the queen, a skull, a shoe, a can, Marilyn, all become part of the same glossy, colorful language. In addition to one’s ability to print on a wide spectrum of surfaces, screen-printing allows an image to be â€Å"saved† (one may simply store and re-use the stencil or matrix in a later situation. Thus we see Warhol’s â€Å"vocabulary† (lexicon? ) of celebrities and other iconic images juxtaposed in shifting circumstances – being exercised in a language of signs. These (printed signs) juxtapositions can homogenize even the most horrific of images, emphasizing our mediated relationship to the trauma depicted. T his homogenization leaves space for interpretation – it can be argued that Warhol has intentionally treated the car crash and the Campbell soup as equal – not as references to the actual world. Alternately, it might be argued that the images are intended to shock a complacent consumer culture back to reality through conspicuously violent juxtapositions. By positioning such horrorific images in the proximity of the celebrity portrait, in the â€Å"low art† language of the advertisement, Warhol critiques a consumer culture lulled into apathy since the War by the numbing effects of Television, advertising, glossy celebrity tabloids, and the veritable glut of shiny new objects available for purchase on every store shelf. I’d like to congratulate the GRAM on a wonderful exhibit. Curator Richard Axsiom has done a marvelous job of pulling together a broad spectrum of Warhol’s strongest/most resonant images†¦and I’d like to invite you all downstairs/to the museum’s studio for screen-printing demonstration. THE IMAGERY: Celebrities or anonymous – these are images to represent the â€Å"masses†. Art should be for the pubic, but how do you represent the â€Å"public body†? – through the icons they look to, or the anonymous Marilyn image that disintegrates and fades out. Elvis that overlaps. – (silver screen/motion Warhol’s remark that all of what he has to say is right there on the surface is misinterpreted as mistaken as superficiality – a dismissal of content – argued that it supports indiscriminate images and passivity. I would argue that Warhol’s imagery is anything but indiscriminate, and is engaged in the long history of the print as a means of social critique. I want everybody to think alike. Russia is doing under government. It’s happening here all by itself. I don’t think art should be only for the select few. I think it should be for the mass of American people. How does one represent â€Å"the mass of American people†? Through it’s proxies, through its object of consumption, soup cans, Coke bottles. Media icons stand it for the body of the masses. Disaster and death were not his primary concerns, but rather the anonymous victims of history – the masses. D and D evoke this mass subject, for in a society of spectacle this subject often appears only in stories and images of mass death. Celebrity and anonymity represent the mass subject. Enter into/immerse himself in the language of pop culture. With silk-screening, you pick a photograph, blow it up, transfer it in glue onto silk, and then roll ink across so that the ink goes through the silk but not through the glue. That way you get the same image, slightly different each time. It was all so simple – quick and chancy. I was thrilled with it. † Warhol hand-printed unique silkscreen images on canvas in the e arly 1960s, and he began simultaneously to translate this technique to printing on paper. He experiments with subjects that directly relate to his paintings of the same period, as in Cagney, Race Riot, and the Ambulance Disaster. These works on paper were printed in monochromatic tones and screened in a method that retained the graininess and immediacy of the mass media images on which they were based. Warhol considered these works to be unique drawings. Changes in the ink saturation and/or in the composition during the printing process created variations in each work. Popular impressions of Pop reduced to candy – it was almost too effective in its critique, ceased to function as a critique – irony and sardonic qualities become eye candy only – another commodified visual confection. The profound flatness of images such as the soup cans – these images exaggerate the lack of roundness – these are cylindrical objects – void of their substance/their mass. Warhol Prints Not to overlook the obvious Flatness Repetition Imperfection Juxtaposition The multiple, mutable, recombinant image – Warhol’s prints are responding/exploiting each of the inherent potentials of the print. Reality as a mediated phenomenon is the subject of Warhol. Private fantasy and public reality is a primary concern of Warhol’s brand of Pop.

The Executive Branch essays

The Executive Branch essays Powers and Limitations of the Executive Needless to say, the executive branch of our government is historically and presently a key role in our approach to an envisioned perfection of democracy. The executive has such a substantial effect in nearly every aspect of our political and economical situation because of the powers we the republic have chosen to delegate and entrust to this office. Because of its importance and power I felt impetus to write on this topic. The executive is a power in itself independent of the Congress but also in most cases restricted in power by that of Congress and the Supreme Court. The Constitution is specific on a few certain powers of the executive while being somewhat vague on other powers based more so on ones interpretations and also precedents that may have been set forth in previous terms. But we may want to read the 'fine print' because along with these executive powers there come limitations in order to prevent any sort of tyranny or dictatorship. Probably the most effective or compelling power given the executive would be the veto power in which case the president may veto a bill sending it back to its origin with reasoning. Some would say the veto power is a means of defense for him and his office from being reduced to a subject of the legislature, thus maintaining its independence. Of course, even the presidents most compelling power has limitation. Congress is able to override his veto with a two-thirds vote in both houses. Of the 2,550 vetoes signed by our past 42 presidents, 106 were overridden by Congress, a little over 1%. This is not a discouraging number when analyzing the power the executive possesses. As much as the president is himself a powerful figurehead of our country, those appointed directly below him as part of the executive branch have a considerable amount of influence and say in the presidents decision making. For this very reason, the ...

Ted Cruzs Net Worth

Ted Cruzs Net Worth Ted Cruzs net worth is about $3.6 million, according to an analysis of the personal financial disclosures he has filed with the U.S. Senate. The Republican from Texas, who aspires to be president of the United States, lists more than 30 assets that, combined, are worth at least $2.2 million and as much as $4.9 million. It is difficult to provide an exact value for Ted Cruzs net worth because members of the Senate are required only to disclose estimates of their holdings. The $3.6 million figure represents an average of minimum and maximum values of his assets in 2016. Though Cruzs net worth well exceeds  the $69,000 net worth of the average American household in the United States, it by no means makes him the wealthiest member  of Congress. A  Center for Responsive Politics analysis  ranked Cruz 41th wealthiest among the U.S. Senates 100 members in 2015. Cruz was ranked 144th among all members of the House and Senate who filed personal financial disclosures for the 2013 calendar year, according to Roll Call.   Among Cruzs earnings in 2016 was advance from book publisher HarperCollins for more than $271,000, according to his personal financial disclosure form for that year, which is publicly available through the U.S. Senate. Cruzs Net Worth Becomes a Campaign Issue Cruzs net worth  became the subject of discussion during his 2012 campaign for U.S. Senate when he and his wife, Heidi, dropped their entire savings of $1.2 million into that election.  Ã¢â‚¬Å"Sweetheart, I’d like us to liquidate our entire net worth, liquid net worth, and put it into the campaign,† Cruz said, recounting his conversation for The New York Times in October 2013.  Ã¢â‚¬Å"What astonished me, then and now, was Heidi within 60 seconds said, ‘Absolutely,’ with no hesitation. Despite his status as a millionaire and his position in the wealthiest top-third of Congress, Cruz has been a vocal critic of growing gap between the richest and poorest Americans and bemoaned the fall of the middle class. Responding to Obamas State of the Union speech in 2015, he said: The facts are were facing right now a divided America when it comes to the economy. Its true that the top one percent are doing great under Barack Obama. Today, the top one percent earn a higher share of our national income than any year since 1928. The sad reality is, with big government, under the Obama administration, the rich and powerful, those who walked the corridor of power in the Obama administration have gotten fat and happy. But working men and women across this country, we have the lowest labor force participation since 1978 the reason the unemployment rate keeps falling is millions of people keep dropping out of the work force all together. Comparison to Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama Cruz sought the Republican presidential nomination in 2016. His net worth paled in comparison to that of reported billionaire Donald Trump, who ultimately won the nomination and the presidency. Cruz was also worth less than former U.S. Sen. and  onetime Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. At the time,  Clinton was is worth at least $5.2 million and as much as $25.5 million, according to personal financial disclosures she filed in 2012.   Cruz Made Money As a Private Practice and Government Lawyer Before Cruz entered the  Senate in 2013 he served in statewide office in Texas, as solicitor general. He served in that capacity from 2003 until May of 2008. During  that time he also  taught U.S. Supreme Court Litigation as an adjunct law professor of Law at the University of Texas School of Law. From 2001 to 2003, Cruz worked as the director of the Office of Policy Planning at the Federal Trade Commission and  as and associate deputy attorney general at the U.S. Department of Justice. He was in private practice before that.Cruzs wife is a managing director at the investment firm Goldman Sachs. Ted Cruzs Salary and Investments As a member of the U.S. Senate, Cruz is paid a base salary of $174,000. He is invested heavily in the oil and gas industries, and holds dozens of other securities and investments, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

Where are you going, where have you been joyce carol oates Research Paper

Where are you going, where have you been joyce carol oates - Research Paper Example The story is reflection of the dangers faced by people during the Civil Rights movement during the mid 1960s. During this period, people started challenging the moral and social conventions after the World War II. This was a time of Civil Right Movement and popular cultures. Some of the incidences that proved the dangers of rebellion includes JFK killing. Just like Connie in the story, JFK died for being rebellious during the same era in which Oates wrote her story. Lyndon and Kennedy were both the presidents of the United States who fought for Civil rights. Kennedy supported the campaign against racial segregation and supported civil rights. However, he later distanced himself from the movements because many Southern Whites were not happy. He thought it would be difficult to pass civil rights laws with the strong opposition from the whites. Fighting for civil right led to his killing in the year 1963. Lyndon also fought by signing the civil right bill which prohibited discrimination on racial grounds (Gaines 3). Oates was also inspired to write her book during the time of Martin Luther and Malcolm X. The two leaders demonstrated the dangers of rebellion during the era of civic right movements. Malcolm was rebellion because he used violence when fighting for freedom and rights of his supporters. He supported civil right in a violent way. This led to his assassination in the year 1965. His character is reflected in Connie in the story. It was important for Connie to get her freedom. However, she acquired it in a wrong way. Martin Luther also supported civil rights. However, he did not believe in violence. He fought for freedom in harmonious and passive way. However, he was still opposed the existing laws. He rebel against racist and lack of freedom in a verbal way. His fight for civil right led to his assassination during the same era Oates wrote her book (Gaines 2). In addition, Oates was motivated to write his