Modernism and Conceptual Art Thesis Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 6500 words

Modernism and Conceptual Art - Thesis Example The essay "Modernism and Conceptual Art" discusses relationships between modernism and conceptual art. Conceptual art is widely regarded to have begun in the ‘dada’ movement that occurred in Switzerland, Germany, France, America, and other countries during the early 20th Century. Dada artists like Marcel Duchamp enshrined urinals on pedestals, signing them with an alias in parody of the authoritative time stamp and signature which was already equated with monetary value in the fame or status driven art, gallery, and collectibles trade at the time. Similarly, Rene Magritte famously inscribed â€Å"Ceci n'est pas une pipe† across a painting of a pipe, to inspire many who studied art to question the nature of artistic representation in an era where formal abstract painting was being developed as a valid method of self-expression. In the modern perception of the artist, his or her personal views, theories, conflicts, psychology, and philosophy of life are all assumed to be summarized and expressed through the process of art, completely or in fragments, creating objects of appreciation with symbolic social messages and embodying a personal commitment to an aesthetic, beauty or truth. Yet, the viewer or audience may ultimately interpret a work outside of its original intended context, just as art history elevates some artists and themes to make them canonical, collectible, valuable, and teachable on a social level of shared subjectivities. Conceptual Art is inherently critical.

The American Dream in the 1960's Research Paper

The American Dream in the 1960's - Research Paper Example The impression of the American Dream stays rooted in the U.S. Pronouncement of Independence that declares all men got created equal and endowed by their maker with certain, absolute rights including Liberty, Life and the pursuit of Joy (Ward 13). To bury the entire American Dream with the 60’s would be a lot, but a substantial share of it certainly appears to have gotten lost with the bright new leaders assassinations, the violent suffocation of political scandals, protest movements, and the long strained out Vietnam war. As it became apparent that the movement had eventually failed in its efforts to make a change, the American Dream absconded a little further from the people who fought to implement it (Cullen 6). This paper aims at producing an understanding of the relocation of the American Dream and played a significant in establishing a new way of life to avoid the fear of the previous generation’s traditions. Since its establishment in 1776, the US has regarded and endorsed itself as an empire of prosperity and liberty. The implication of "American Dream" has transformed over the progress of history. Historically, this Dream originated from the New World mystique especially concerning the accessibility for farm ownership low - cost land. As the Virginia Royal governor noted in 1774 that the Americans for ever envisage the Lands further off remain still better than those which stay already settled. He further added that if they achieved Paradise, they would go on if they perceived of an improved place farther west (Hochschild 34). Today, the ethos simply indicates the aptitude through participation in the economy and society, for everyone to achieve success. According to this dream, all included the opportunity for the individual’s children to grow up receiving a suitable education and career deprived of artificial barriers. It is the occasion to make individual choices with the void of the prior restrictions that restricted people acco rding to their caste, religion, race, or ethnicity and class. Immigrants to the US sponsored ethnic papers in their language; the editors normally promoted the American Dream (Olson 34). The politics in 1960s reflects revolution in the Martin Luther King Jr. life. He changed lives of blacks for countless years to come. Martin Luther Jr. did this once he began to advocate for blacks from 1955 to 1968. His efforts ended in 1968 since he got assassinated while he led a demonstration in Tennessee. Even though, he got assassinated, his dream lives on nowadays. Martin Luther Jr. influenced the 1960s in many perspectives. He fought sturdily against racism and protested several times against it. He remains one of the leading reasons why the US remains the way it stands today (Olson 112). Another changing politics element in the 1960s stood the John F. Kennedy presidential term. He remained one of the four American presidents who got successfully assassinated. The John F. Kennedy assassinati on eventually led to the establishment of a police force which protected the president. However, before his death, he got involved in three key events in US history; the construction of the Berlin Wall, American Civil Rights Movement, the Cuban Missile Crisis. The presidential term of John F. Kennedy has changed America and prepared it the way it stands today (Olson 113). A third constituent of change in 1960s politics remained in the war at Vietnam. It stood a time for change because of several motives. One of the many motives stood because of the draft;

Africa by Maya Angelou Analysis

Africa by Maya Angelou Analysis Thus she had lain sugar cane sweet deserts her hair golden her feet mountains her breasts  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   5 two Niles her tears. Thus she has lain Black through the years. Over the white seas Rime white and cold  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   10 Brigands ungentled icicle bold took her daughters Sold her strong sons churched her with Jesus  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   15 bled her with guns Thus she has lain. Now she is rising remember her pain remember he losses  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   20 her screams loud and vain remember her riches her history slain now she is striding although she had lain  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   25 [Explication] Maya Angelou, an African American poet, wrote the poem Africa about the tragic events held by the European men who invaded Africa. Angelou uses rhyming techniques as well as imagery and metaphors to describe the actions made in African history. With those techniques she helps us with an image of what it was like to live in Africa during this time period. The poem is separated into three stanzas and twenty-five lines. Each stanza contains vivid words to give a certain image in your head.   Angelou uses metaphors to compare the continent, Africa, to a healthy woman. This comparison between continents and women are used a lot to describe the state or well being of it. Each stanza shows slight variations to show the transitions of tone. Within those twenty-five lines, Angelou uses the rhyme scheme ABCB. The rhyming of this poem helps with how it is structured. In the first stanza, the woman is being brought into character. She is being described as different landmarks in Africa with the use of metaphors. Angelou uses landmarks such as mountains (5), deserts (3), and the Nile River (6) to give the woman vivid description of her physical appearance. Two Niles her tears (6) in this line she is comparing the way her tears flow to the way the Nile River flows. The use of imagery is used throughout this stanza. The first four lines in the second stanza, Angelou uses rime (10) and cold (10) to give us a brief description of the setting when the brigands (11) came to Africa ready to take away from the land. The next four lines are the about the actions the brigands (11) done to the women in Africa. Lines 14 and 15 state, took her young daughters / sold her strong sons to give us off the idea of slavery. This transition of tone gives the unpleasant and unwanted aspect of this part in the poem. At the end of this stanza, line 17 just like the first stanza, line 7 Thus she has lain which shows the uncomfortable effect to what the white men did to her. In the last stanza, she talks about her overcoming the obstacles. Even though all the harshness she has been through, now she is striding. This stanza is in present tense unlike the other stanzas. This shows her progress from the pain she has endured. The tone in this stanza is more of accepting the fact and embracing what the white men did. In lines 19 and 20, she uses the word remember twice so that we remember what happened to her. The ending of this stanza states the same line, although she has lain in reference to her overcoming all the bad that she encountered. This line also helps us see that she is moving forward from everything that has happened. In conclusion, African American poet, Maya Angelou, uses descriptive detail and convincing evidence to convey her thoughts about the country of Africa. Within this poem holds three stanzas which contain the explanation of the various usage of color imagery, metaphors, and other forms of literary elements. As we begin to journey into the poem with the first stanza, this is where Mrs. Angelou compares the likeness of a woman to the geological structures of the country itself. As in the second stanza the writer provides bits of imagery while explaining how the land was taken over as well as the actions taken upon women during this time. Finally, she comes to conclusion in the last stanza to show all the country has fought for and being able to overcome the obstacles set on their paths.

A Transient Citizen Essay -- American Citizenship Immigration Essays

A Transient Citizen "...1 hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince or state of whom or which I have been a subject or citizen...." This is a clause from an oath I took on February 6, 2002—an ordinary day of no significance to most people, a climatic point in my life—it was the day I became a U.S. citizen. I did not attend the formal ceremony in the Los Angeles Convention Center, yet for me it did not matter; I was still just as excited, for this was the day I became a true American. There were many people from different cultures in the noisy office where I received my certificate, yet we were all filled with the same excitement—the potential of the American Dream and to be part of the greatest nation. It seemed that every time an employee came out they called someone else, as if I was not even there, and I started to worry. The fear of returning home without being a citizen of this nation started to cross my mind. Two hours passed and I was sitting in the same chair listening to the noise of the typewriters inside the offices. Then, as if time itself had stopped, it happened; they called me to the front window. It was as if I as walking to the doors of heaven. I recognized that it was not the end but rather a new beginning. It was the creation of a new person. The oath was simple; I had promised to support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies. I choked on the very words when I realized I had just taken an oath promising to bear arms even against the country of my birth. For so long I envisioned perfection as the day I would become a citizen of a country that I had learned to love. I realized ... ...goals aimed at success, having a stable job or owning a house, but it is now a long-term goal that seeks to find a stable point between two nations even if the nations themselves are not at peace. Now that I have gone through the process of applying for United States citizenship, I have taken the responsibility to choose between Mexico and The United States—between my roots and my future. I have taken an oath, not only before The Great American seal, but also and most importantly before God. I do not wish to question whether I regret becoming a citizen or not, for the only obstacle that is always holding us back is not being able to let go of the past. However, I cannot completely erase what I feel for Mexico, for I do not want to forget my heritage, mi cultura. I may be bound to the American flag and the U.S. Constitution, but I am still proud of being Mexican.

Peaceful and Happy Personality, Positive Lifestyle Essay

They promote the utmost understanding of the present rather than dealing with the past. Since they give importance to the dealings of their spontaneous actions, they let go of their subconscious dealing with the environment. In having this kind of belief, Zen Buddhists kind of meditation promotes focusing on the inner strength of the present to give them a more valuable interpretation of their own experiences. It emphasizes dharma practices for them to awaken their spiritual factor thriving in them. To attain further discovery of their self, they must submit themselves in the understanding of their present state of being. Zen Buddhism discourages the strong association of their life to written texts and oral tradition of answering metaphysical matter. They promote this kind of belief for them to be able to address the limitations of their actions and for them to attest their discipline and hold to their own teachings. Many had been practicing this kind of religion because of its simplicity but complex understanding of the complex flow of their life. Since they do not hold many teachings on the philosophical written documents, many said that this kind of practice is against the law of words and against the theoretical framework of many religions existing today. This kind of belief of Zen Buddhism lead to their diverse understanding of their situation thus giving them a perspective of life and its attached meaning to their personal events and perspective to the kind of perception that they have. Taking the beliefs of Zen Buddhism, it is important to see it as an â€Å"influence† to the environment, positively or negatively, in which a person belongs. Therefore, through the collective efforts of the Buddhists, as they have made an impression to the people, they have gained this special discipline that allows them to live in a simple way without to many needs and frustrations in life. It advocates the pursuit a non-greed life in human pursuits in a non-violent way. (De Silva, 1992) They like being quiet and avoid noises for it distracts the meditation of the soul. So, this values practice helps them to reach their goal of a peaceful and a suffering-less life. Since they give importance to their peaceful way of life, they believed that through this, they can have a good personality especially in interacting with other members of the society. Although some of them chose to stay far away from people to avoid distractions, many of them still wants to influence other people by showing them how to be a real Zen Buddhist. And because of this, they become happier in dealing with their everyday experience. By looking at them in the society, they tend to have more stable emotional attachments because of the training that they have in their religion. If we will merge the idea of Zen Buddhism and their teachings, we can notice their emotion in their dealings with everyday’s scenario. Since they have the meditation and focus on the present situation of their life, in effect, they developed system of interaction that promotes same way of living with the teachings of their religion. In this way, Zen Buddhist keeps their focus on conscious thinking with regards to their experiences. In addition to that, Zen Buddhists have different meanings on their personal choices and perception to any problem that they may encounter. At this point, Zen Buddhists attained a certain level of acceptance and happiness to deal with their life and to give positive meanings to their endeavors and suffering. This attitude in life constitutes not only our perception but also our actions in dealing with other people and into different situation. Through their teaching of not only what is good and bad but on how to live your life to be able to be good, we can see the varying result. Buddhists are calmer and quieter in dealing even with the most pressure driven situation in life. They do not resort to any kind of violence in solving conflicts that arisen, but rather chose to a peaceful negotiation and trust to the capabilities of a human soul. This is one of their practices in relation to karma, or the fruit of their actions. Believing that if they do good, something good will happen to them.

Capitalism vs Democracy

The political system and the economic system of the United States have been intertwined since the very founding of our country. Although there are many different views on how well the systems work or how they function, this has been a common thought shared by all different sides. Some have an optimistic view of capitalism, while others feel as though capitalism favors too few people. Two major points of view, the conservative and the â€Å"reform† liberal, describe how capitalism works, and the role for the government in managing the marketplace, in two similar, yet very different ways. First, we look at the thoughts of Milton Friedman, of the conservative point of view. According to Friedman, capitalism is a free market system that is driven from the bottom up, starting with individuals who make voluntary choices to purchase goods and services and hold jobs. Having a free marketplace gives every individual the power to create their own economic destiny, from what food they eat, to what car they drive, to what career they choose. Friedman also describes capitalism as â€Å"self-correcting†, that if left alone, the market place will inevitably fix any problems it creates. According to Friedman, capitalism follows a cycle, consisting of ups and downs in the economy that will eventually work themselves out over time. It begins with a future expectation of profit, and people with money to invest. As more people begin to invest their money, the demand for labor and materials increases, leading to economic expansion and more people spending money. As demand continues to increase, supply begins to decrease, causing inflation and increasing product prices. At this stage, future expectations of profit are bad. As prices rise, people can’t afford to buy things, so they start to pull their money out of the market and investments. With fewer investments comes less demand, causing people to lose their jobs, prices to drop, and consumers to buy fewer goods. This ultimately leads to a recession, where demand for products is very low and often the unemployment rate is high. Then the cycle starts over again, cost conditions are recreated and people begin to invest money again, and the cycle continues. Another benefit of capitalism is that it allows for healthy economic competition, which not only gives individuals a larger variety of products, but also enables the marketplace to regulate its own prices. This also causes power to be widespread, and keeps people satisfied by being able to purchase what they like. For example, a consumer voluntarily goes to a grocery store. As they walk down the beverage aisle, they see a large selection of drinks to choose from, this is because of competition. Since there are various products to choose from, every consumer can decide to buy what type of beverage they like, making the consumers happy. Friedman also argues that capitalism is rational and efficient. The marketplace constantly finds a way to do more with less, and with every economic decision made, the costs and benefits are weighed first. In a capitalist economy, no one is going to do business unless they gain more than they lose. For example, if a person wants to start a business baking cakes, they would first determine how much money they need to invest to be able to make the cake, and compare it to how much they could sell each cake for. If it costs more to make the cake than they would be able to sell it for, then of course the person isn’t going to do it. The whole point of investing and even purchasing with capitalism is to make a profit, or somehow gain from the exchange. Nobody enters into a business contract knowing they are going to lose money. This is why Friedman claims that one’s standard of living should be based on what they can afford. Even basic necessities of life, such as food and shelter, are not rights of an individual, but a result of the economic decisions they make. Someone who works hard and has a better job can afford a nice house over an apartment, or to eat lobster instead of chicken. With capitalism, everyone has the right to pursue the things they want or need, but they do not have the right to just have them. This ensures that everyone has the freedom of choice in the marketplace, and the liberty to make a successful life for themselves, for Friedman believes conducting the economy in a voluntary manner is better for the social fabric of society. Milton Friedman believes there is a role for the government in economic affairs, but that role is very limited. The government’s purpose is to protect the rights and liberties of its citizens, and to be free politically, we must be free economically. He claims that the only time the government should step in is when â€Å"market failure† occurs, or when the market can’t or we don’t want it to do something. The federal government should only involve itself in economic affairs to enforce the rules set by and agreed upon by the people, mediate differences among citizens on the meaning of the rules, and allow a way for the rules to be modified if necessary. For example, printing currency should be a federal government function, to allow a fair and uniform payment method throughout the country. The government should also be in charge of regulating monopolies, where the freedom to make choices is compromised by the fact that there is no competition. Another instance would be in situations where there is a â€Å"neighborhood effect†, or when a third party is affected by a decision that they were not a part of, such as pollution. If a farmer were to dump waste into a stream and pollute it, that would violate the rights of other people who use the stream to have clean water. It would also be the function of the government to regulate â€Å"public goods†, or something where it is difficult or impossible to determine the particular user or the amount used. For example, a lighthouse is a public good, because it is almost impossible to identify who uses the light to guide them or how often they use it. Friedman ultimately believes that the government should stay out of economic affairs as much as possible, for every time the government acts the freedom of the people shrinks, and all government interventions have more costs then they do benefits. When the government regulates the way a business operates, for example, requiring steel plants to put filters on their smoke stacks, it increases the cost of doing business, which increases prices and decreases sales, production, jobs and wages. Capitalism, according to Friedman, has a way of efficiently working things out on its own, and needs very little government intervention. Many programs we have today, such as social security, Medicare, and welfare to name a few, Friedman would do away with, as they are the responsibility of the individual, not the government. The marketplace is even more proportional to public demand than the political system is, and will constantly cycle through different phases and work itself out without the need of government regulation. Milton Friedman looks at capitalism as a free and voluntary system that should be driven by the consumer not the federal government. Another approach to the way capitalism works is that of the â€Å"reform† liberal, which has a few similarities to the conservative point of view, such as the belief that capitalism and democracy are interlocked, that aving capital or money to invest drives the market, that the government must intervene when the market â€Å"fails†, and on the general definition of property. The liberals also believe in the business cycle, with only one major difference. According to Kane and the liberals, the business cycle is not continuous and self-correcting, but gets stuck at the tail end of a recession. With so many people out of work, they begin to s uffer and make drastic decisions. People don’t have time to just wait for the market to fix itself, it could take years and if they did, too much damage would have already been done. The liberals believe that people have the right to basic needs, such as food and shelter, in which the marketplace will not provide. This is where the government must intervene, to ensure that all people have the resources they need to survive, and to correct the marketplace and pull the economy out of the recession. According to the liberals, the market is a prison, and it is not driven from the bottom up, but rather from the top down. They believe when it comes to purchasing power, there is no comparison. Corporations have a much greater influence and power in the economy than the individual, which leads to a privileged position of business. The decisions we make to purchase things are not voluntary or mutually beneficial, because the corporations and business owners set the prices, and for things like housing, we as consumers don’t have the option to just not buy it. We are forced to pay for the things we need, and the prices are set by the business owners, in which the product may not even be worth. Another problem they see with capitalism is that there is a â€Å"permanent shortfall in aggregate demand†, or that there are too many people with too little money to spend. With not enough money, the average individual doesn’t have the ability to make purchase, which leads to under consumption, and ultimately to a decline in the economy. With all of the power being held by the few in major corporations, this constantly widens the gap between the rich and the poor. In theory, capitalism gives all people equality in the marketplace, but in actuality, the liberals argue that this is not the case. Since the rich and elite own the majority of things to own, their interests are honored first, making the interests of the common people unequal to that of the business leaders, and sometimes not served at all. Also, we face resource constraint, so all the people who have money continue to get more money than others. This separation will just continue to grow until the government intervenes, creating more problems and making it harder for the economy as a whole to pull out of hard times. The liberals also argue that the way capitalism is designed, people only invest or produce things to make a profit, furthering their own interests, instead of doing it because people need it. If you can’t pay for your food, you go hungry, no one is going to simply give it to you because you are starving. With this, capitalism is a trap for those who can’t afford to survive, and the liberals believe that it is one’s right to have their basic needs met. Their overall view of capitalism is a negative one, feeling that capitalism alone cannot provide adequately for the majority of the citizens of America. The liberals feel that the government should and needs to have a strong role in the economy in order for capitalism to serve the people. Programs such as Medicare, welfare, and government regulations are necessary to give people equality in our economic system. The government needs to be responsible for regulating monopolies, to ensure that prices can remain fair and citizens have options in the products they buy. Also, minimum wages, working conditions and hours worked should be regulated to give people the opportunity to make a decent living, and not be taken advantage of by corporations and employers. The rights and definition of property need to be established politically to be fair across the board. To the liberals, the more government involvement there is in the economy, the more freedom the individual has to make good money and have a decent standard of living. Political power and economic power are not two separate entities, and leaving more power in the marketplace imprisons democracy. More economic power and more capital translate directly into more political power. Major corporations and companies have much influence over what interests are met in the government, for example, anything that jeopardizes business confidence in society has immediate and harsh consequences politically, but something that violates and individual’s wealth may not be addressed at all. Money talks in America, and this contributes more to a corporations own needs, giving less and less attention to what is best for the average citizens. Liberals like Lindblom, state that the market will not provide on its own, and things like food, clothing, shelter, education, health care, and transportation need to be taken care of by the government, rather than being left up to the marketplace. The government needs to be responsible for more than just market failure, currency, and public goods. It needs to protect the citizens of our country from the detrimental effects of capitalism, provide regulations, a way to keep the market prosperous, and keep us from getting stuck in a recession. Democracy needs to be more powerful than the economic system, and make sure that everyone’s rights, as a corporation or an individual, are protected and that all of their interests are served with equal importance. Both the â€Å"reform† liberal and conservative points of view agree on some of the basic components of capitalism, but their opinion of the government’s role and how well capitalism works on its own couldn’t be more different. Today, we favor the liberal view in actuality, with many government programs and regulations in place. However, it remains a controversial issue in politics today, as there is much debate on whether or not we should return to the original form of federalism and eliminate much of the current government intervention. Regardless, one thing all parties can agree on is that the economic and political systems of the United States are and forever will be interlocked with one another.