Side effects of the internet

Nicholas Carr, the author of the book "The Shallows", points out many negative effects the internet has had on us. Such as lack of memory, difficulty reading mass amounts of text, and a shortened attention span. It is ironic considering he is writing about how we don't have enough attention to read a book in his 200 some odd page novel. In the process of writing his book he moved from a suburb in Boston to the mountains of Colorado. He disconnected him self from everything. Disabled his blog, cancelled his facebook and twitter, and cut back of instant messaging and skyping. In a matter of time his writing changed from random out bursts of thoughts to being able to write for a long period. Carr observes, "Although even the initial users of the technology can often sense the changes in their patterns of attention, cognition, and memory as their brains adapt to the new medium, the most profound shifts play out more slowly, over several generations"(199). Even after he altered his life style he has gone back to the technology he was accustomed to, admitting he's not sure if he could live with out it. 

This book has really shown me how much the internet and technology has changed the way we do things and think considering it has taken me about an hour and a half to write this blog because in the mean time I've checked facebook about 6 times played a game or two of tetris and watched Chelsea Lately. There has also been a few times when I didn't have access to a computer or phone and when I didn't have it, it was really nice because I didn't have to talk to people but once I got back I was sucked right back into using it religiously which shows how addictive technology can be.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUW_8cWG7YA (Under Pressure- David Bowie and Queen)

vs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rog8ou-ZepE (Ice Ice Baby- Vanilla Ice)

Both of these songs are very popular and very much the same. The background beat of "Under Pressure" was stolen by Vanilla Ice. Controversy over the stolen beat still continues to this day. Vanilla Ice claims that his beat is different than Bowies, because his has an extra "do" in it. If you listen very closely you can sort of hear it. But casually listening to it, you would never be able to tell the difference.

In this case I think that Vanilla Ice flat out ripped off David Bowie. In instances like one musician taking the beats or lyrics from one song and blandly putting it in theirs, is wrong. But for "mash ups" and remixes I think it is okay. Because the people making them are typically not trying to pass it as their own work. They are simply combining multiple songs into one. For example http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNzrwh2Z2hQ&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL, This song is in no way trying to take credit for all of the songs used, its simple putting all of them together to make a new sound. This song has 34 million views but doesn't make a penny off of it, the song isn't even on Itunes.

In the case of re creating art, I believe the same thing. It is wrong to repaint or recreate another's piece of art, not change anything and try to pass it off as yours. But there's a difference between the work we saw in class today by Picasso, and the re-do of Mona Lisa. They got the idea's from other artists but put their spin on it. In the case of Picasso, he even named it the same, so clearly people will know where he got the idea form.

Over all, I think it is wrong to flat out steal, versus take the idea and make it your own.

Best of the week- First post of 2011!

The best of the week I thought was Once. When you told us we were watching it in class during the final, I was relieved we weren't doing an in class paper or anything, but I thought it was going to be boring and I wasn't too excited. As we were watching the movie, you could tell that they started to like

each other and as the story goes on you want them to end up together. But unfortunately they don't and and that is one way that the movie breaks the status quo, because in every other hollywood produced movie they probably would have ended up together.

I also really liked the music that was in the movie. There were parts in it that made me want to cry. When I was talking to someone in 2nd period they said it was almost like a musical. That kind of made me skeptical because I'm not too big of a musical fan. But I downloaded a few of the songs. I never even heard of the songs before either, even though it won an oscar. Over all I think the movie was really good and it introduced me to new music that I really like.

Humes

I thought that Humes was the most interesting because I think that I believe in a lot of what he talks about such as open mindedness, miracles, and us not being born with a set of expectations. He is also an agnostic which I consider myself to be as well.

When he was talking about miracles he was saying that he didn't not believe in them or he did, he simply said that he has never experienced one there fore he couldn't say that they didn't exist. I can say the same because I have never experienced a miracle but I have heard of stories that are miracles. In Psychology of Living were learning about depression and suicide and we watched this video about people jumping off the Golden Gate Bridge. This one guy jumped and as he was falling he realized he didn't want to die. He fell to the water and came up, he should  have died either on impact or of a heart attack on the 220 foot drop. But a wave went over as he was falling which broke his fall somewhat and before his boots filled up with water two sea lions carried him to the surface. I consider this to be a miracle because he should be dead but he realized he didn't want to and something saved him. I can say that they can happen I have just never experieced it.

Hume believed that a set of expectations is not innate . The world is like it is and it is something we get to know. He talks about how a child wouldn't think that a man suspended in the air is as astonishing as a grown adult would because the adult knows that someone suspended in the air is supposed to be physically impossible. He goes into talking about cause and effect and how one thing is supposed to go after another, or if it simply exists with in itself. I found this to be very interesting because it shows that we can make of what we want out of the world, and it made me question if the laws of nature simply 'are' or if we make things to be impossible and possible.

Best of the Week

I thought that the "Best of the Week" was the movies by Leni Riefenstahl because we watched two contrasting works by her, which displayed her. The first one, which was the divers from the olympics, showed elegance. She also used different video editing techniques such as shooting from different angles and slowing it down at certain points. The second one started out elegant and displayed beautiful parts of Germany. Then it began to showcase Hitler and his power of the Nazi party. She shot from many strategic angles in this film to highlight the mass amount of people in the convention center. It also led to the class discussion of what is art and is racist idea's are considered art. I thought that was interesting as well because  our class got into some philosophy. I wouldn't Leni Riefenstahl's work art because it is more propaganda. Some propaganda can be considered art if it is a poster or something. But since it was more of a documentary I wouldn't consider her work art.

Aestetics

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCA6bdRgN8E

The choreographer is Emily Shock. She is a very cutting edge, contemporary choreographer. She choreographs for a very popular dance team and I kind of find her stuff over rated. But this piece I think is very good because she makes the bodies match the instruments. For instance when the violin is playing their bodies are melting and swaying. Or when the bass is being plucked they are sharp and intense. Also, the musicality, When the singer says "eye's" the choreographer doesn't have the dancers touch their eyes or do anything that the audience would expect. But instead she has the girls looking around. Or the singer say's "world" and the girls moving around aimlessly. She also has some repetition in the piece, which I generally don't like because I want to see something new. But in this case when the music repeats the dancer's are also repeating what they just did. At one part they are all slightly bent over and then they fall down, then that part repeats because the bass repeats.

There is also hardly any technical elements, (turns, jumps, etc...) which is unlike the choreographer. I liked how she didn't put in technical stuff because it show's off the dancing ability, and you can see the story behind the song rather than showing off the girls skills. I think that she actually took something presently and made it into this dance. I can tell that the dance has real emotion going on, not just a made up story to try to win a competition. Which is typically what most competitive choreographers try to do, just jam as much eye catching stuff into a dance as possible and make it look good, and I appreciate that she came up with something from the heart and showcased it for everyone to see.

Gabriel Orozco- First post

Over the past two weeks of school I think that the most interesting person was Gabriel Orozco. I thought it was really interesting how he could take the most simple thing like a spill on the ground and thing of it as art. It was also interesting how he was talented at so many different things like taking pictures and architecture and pottery. While he was making pottery in the video he felt a connection to his ancestors and to the piece itself. He explains that how he feels about all of his work. He quotes, "to be intimate you have to open yourself" which I took that in order to feel a connection to art you need to be able to tap into your emotions and look at things in a different light. An example of looking at something differently is while he's at the grocery he saw it as a perfect place because of the order. Then to mess up the "perfection" he took a bunch of stuff and put it where it didn't belong. I found this particularly fascinating because it is such an everyday place that we go to every day and just see it as a store with food. But he goes in and sees it in a total different way.