Photo Collage

Well... This is my photo collage. When we were first assigned this project, I had no idea what items I would choose. I don't really need any of my personal belongings in order to survive. All of the items I chose are replaceable materials and don't really have sentimental value. While choosing my items, I just looked around my room until something caught my eye as "something I use in my daily life." And although I do very much enjoy and appreciate these items, I would be fine living my life without them. There is one specific item though that I would be devastated if they were ruined. This item is my purple and teal shoes. I received these for Christmas this year and haven't got a chance to wear them yet because of the snow and rain. I have a bit of a shoe obsession and when a pair of new shoes get dirty or scuffed up, it is extremely disappointing. I couldn't really tell someone why this is, but it's just the way my mind is set. This being the case, I put all of my items I enjoy, but don't necessarily need as the background with a sort of cracked screen. It looks like these items are there, but could easily dissolve into nothing. My purple shoes, however, are bright and clear in the middle to show they are the most important to me, at least for now. I'm not sure if this makes me a materialistic person or not, but either way I don't really care. I love these shoes. I'm sure this pair of shoes will eventually fade into the background like everything else, so I put a satin shade on them. This makes them not incredibly bright, but still definitely the center of attention. So... that's pretty much all I have to say about this.

Photography Scavenger Hunt

 Asymmetrical 

 My name on campus (John)

 Unstable image

 Stable image

 Bird POV

 Ant POV

 Person and Surrounding Space

 Person Up Close

 Radial Image

 Symmetrical Image

Map Project

This image is the walk I take to class through my eyes. Joe Camel, 'mascot' of Camel Cigarettes is sitting on a giant Starbucks cup. Joe is just relaxing in his pajamas smoking a cigarette. This reminds me of my mornings, because I usually feel like I'm dying until I get my coffee and a cigarette. Afterwards, I am much more relaxed, like Joe here. The Starbucks cups make a blurred path of the path I take to class each day. It is blurred to show repetition of the same path each day. Also, the blurriness shows that I am usually in a daze walking to class.  I normally look at everyone's shoes while walking around campus, so I put my favorite shoes on Joe Camel.  There is music notes on the RPAC bridge to represent the music I need to be listening to pretty much all the time.

3rd Article

I liked the ideas of the first response by Steve.  He claims to have no qualifications of being an art critic before he lets the reader know his opinions.  I feel like this line is important and rather humorous.  It really helps show the idea of an art critic.  Who exactly is a qualified art critic?  And if so, how did they gain that title?  Art can be anything and can me anything to anyone, or no one.  If there is such thing as an art critic, I would be seriously confused.  This would create the idea that art should be done a certain way.  This is not true at all.  Art can be whatever a person makes it, and doesn't need guidelines.

I was a little confused when the second response claimed, "More people go to art museums than ballgames."  This seems incredibly incorrect to me.  Although I really have no idea, the idea poses some good questions.  If this is true, the amount of art that is talked about or is in the mainstream media is significantly low.  On the television, in the news, or even just talking with friends, there seems to be much more attention to what is happening in the sports world or in the political world.  Advertisement industries pay millions of dollars for a 30 second commercial during the super bowl.  So, if this statement is actually true, I'm confused and also interested where all is this art is being noticed.

Second 2 articles.

In the Walker article, I found the idea of an artist having one "big idea" interesting.  I've never heard of this idea before, but it can really make sense of certain artwork.  For me, it can be really hard to appreciate art if the artwork is not visually appealing.  Once a person learns the artists' "big idea," the artwork can be seen in a completely different way.  It is a good way to make a reputation in the world of art for a person.  I agree that an artists' "big idea" should be personal and something the artist is very passionate about.

I really didn't like the garden project by Jennifer Barnett.  I think she took this idea way too far and is too repetitive.  If I was interested in an artist, I wouldn't want to see 200 versions of the same work.  I realize that all the gardens are all somewhat different, but they are all still gardens.  As a viewer/critic,  I would become uninterested after viewing five or so of essentially the same thing.  As an artist, I would never want to create basically the same work more than a couple of times, let alone 200 times.

The Barrett article explained visual interpretation in a good way.  It's hard to fight subconscious thoughts taking a quick glance of images.  This article helps break down images in a way most people wouldn't interpret them.  The Destiny Child's magazine cover was my favorite example.  It really shows how misleading images can be to the artists.  It shows an artist's work, specifically musicians, can be easily overlooked by advertising images.  This idea has transformed many musicians into performers rather than musicians.

I didn't completely understand the idea in the first section.  I like the idea of showing misleading images of certain African-American stereotypes and trying to make a change, but wouldn't this just lead to a continuation of misunderstood stereotypes?  Stereotypes exist because of what people see in the media or hear about, not usually from their own experience.  If there is multiple images of this same stereotyping, this would lead to the same and possibly an increase in the stereotyping.  But, this is just my opinion.  There could easily be something I interpreted incorrectly.

First 2 articles.

I thought the "Cheese Monkeys" article was interesting to say the least.  The writer seems to view the world in a way that is abstract, yet intelligent.  The idea of perspective and awareness is somewhat obvious, but goes undetected in every day life.  I find this quite intriguing.  I've always thought humans view reality and existence in a close minded fashion.  I say this regarding the dimensions description the author used.  The idea that there could be an infinite amount of dimensions, one looking down upon the other, is remarkable.  I've had similar thoughts about this, but never thought about it on an infinite scale.  It's extremely difficult to see life through a perspective unimaginable to the human mind.  This can easily cause close mindedness among humans.  A lot of people are afraid of the unknown, which at times can be very intimidating.

Although the article was interesting, I didn't fully comprehend some of the writing.  It seemed to be in a format that really makes the reader focus to understand what the writer is attempting to portray.  When I read, "You'd picture Tuesday on the left, and Thursday on the right, and we'd be all set,"I was definitely not set.  The writer sort of jumps all over the place with his/her ideas and goes into minimal detail, specifically the Tuesday, Thursday paragraph.  I may not understand this style of writing completely, so maybe it's suppose to be this way.  It just bothered me that the writer didn't go into further detail with his/her topics and gave such a broad view.

I really appreciated how thorough the detail was in the article "The Heresy of Zone Defense."  I've never thought of basketball as form of art, but this article vividly shows how it can be.  The way the writer compared basketball from the past to present day created an entirely new view of the game.  The best part, in my opinion, is the idea that basketball wasn't meant to have coaches.  It shows how coaches have ruined the game in some peoples' eyes.  I've always viewed coaches positively, so it was interesting to hear a new perspective.

Although I respect the writer's opinion, I entirely disagree with his/her views about the NBAversus college basketball.  S/he explains how the NBA's man to man defense is a better way to play the game.  The reasoning; because no one player is entitled to a certain area, like zone defense would work.  I think this creates a game solely based on who is the better offensive team, rather than using both offensive and defensive techniques.  The NBA is full of the most gifted athletes in the United States and many other countries.  This makes it immeasurably more difficult for a player to guard simply one player.  A zone defense makes the game more strategic, rather than an all star try out for over paid athletes.  When strategy is involved, it helps the team work together and build a more community like setting.

Introduction

Hello.  I am John.  I am studying to be a food chemist with a Food Science Technology degree.  Creative writing and all forms of art are my favorite types of classes in school.  I enjoy scented candles and television shows about the universe.  I am in the process of mastering lucid dreaming (hopefully).  I believe time is an illusion of the mind.  My favorite people are Albert Einstein, Dr. Seuss, Kurt Vonnegut, John Stewart, and Stephen Colbert.  My mind is usually somewhere else daydreaming, which makes class very difficult at times.  I have a serious obsession with mangoes and really want a mango tree.  I love creating and viewing abstract artwork and designs.  I love learning about different cultures and about the future.  Snorkeling in the Caribbean was one of the best times of my life.  I hope to one day have a British and/or Australian accent.  :D

Below is a picture of a watermelon...