Frames of Mind Comparing & Contrasting Political Posters

Preparing to Write, page 373

1. 

  

1. The Nixon Poster:

Frame—uses elements of the American flag such as stars and stripes, uses typical American colors of red, white and blue. The frame is shaped in a rectangle and encloses the more centralized images of Nixon and the accompanying text.

Images—On the poster, there are images that symbolize our country. These typical, and rather cliché images include an eagle at the top, the national bird, and the white house placed directly opposite the eagle at the bottom on the page. These images surround Nixon, almost making him seem as if he is a national icon. Furthermore, there is a multitude of faces. In the crowd there are past presidents, other well-known figures of American history.

Text—The words on the poster read “Nixon’s the one! Nixon” These words seem to be telling viewers either that “of all the possible people to run the country, Nixon is the one,” or that “just as these people have done great things for the nation, Nixon will too.”

2.    2.   Answer stated in previous answer. In addition, I believe that the poster is trying to comment on Nixon as a prime example of everything that embodies the United States.

3.      3.  Visual elements: the poster has very few visual aspects. It simply consists of a close-up, black and white photograph. It forces the viewer to engage the subject and maintain direct eye contact. It is as if he is speaking the text straight to the viewer.

Written elements: In black and white print, the poster reads “Some talk change. Others cause it. Humphrey.” The seemingly confusing and technically grammatically incorrect sentence is actually a rather clever message. The words work to convey the idea that Humphrey might be one of the “others” who cause change, although it is not for certain.  

Readers should infer that whoever Humphrey is, he is probably someone who is interested in not just talking about change, but bringing it about in some way. His facial expression is fairly blank. He is not smiling, as Nixon is, but is not angry or upset. He seems to just be inquisitive and ready to listen.

4.     4.  The overall message of the Humphrey poster is that, in the political realm, there are those who say they will make changes, and then there are those who will make changes. The size and shape of the words are important because they are unavoidable and give the viewer nothing else to believe but what they say.

The two posters are vastly different. One is colorful while the other is monochrome. Those differences reflect the difference in interpretation. The colorful Nixon one leaves the audience with multiple ideas and reminders. The Humphrey gives no range of colors and therefore no range of further interpretation other than what it says, literally in black and white. While  both use the faces of the men they are representing, they do so in different ways. Nixon’s is sketched and is smiling, welcoming. Humphrey’s is a close-up photograph and is rather emotionless. Nixon’s poster is warmer in general. Humphrey’s is somewhat bland and unexciting. 

Who Done It? Mystery in Nashville

The Frist Center for the Visual Arts is giving you the chance to help finish 

"painting the picture"--mystery style!

In a new and exciting interactive activity, inspired by Tracey Snelling's current exhibition, entitled Woman on the Run, Nashvillians are asked to help solve the mystery of Veronica and Victor Hayden--the stars of the exhibit--by unravelling clues and adding to the twists and turns. 

What are you waiting for? Contribute to this ever-changing novella that will continuously unfold in the coming weeks. (You might even win some prizes.)

For all the details about how you can join the sleuth team, click this link: http://fristcenter.org/calendar-exhibitions/detail/woman-on-the-run

New clues are posted on the Frist's facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/fristcenter (Don't forget to "like" them to stay in-the-know!)

Keep your eyes peeled and good luck! 

A Study of Classification and Memory--Frames of Mind

Frames of Mind

Classification

304-305

1.

n  Monuments with human figures

n  Monuments commemorating war

n  Large-scale monuments

n  Monuments relating to another country

n  Monuments as a sign of hope/positive

n  Monuments as a memorial/sad

n  Monuments commemorating past presidents

2.            Things memorialized here in 3 groups:

 War—The Vietnam Memorial, Korean War Memorial

Presidents—Washington Monument, Lincoln Memorial

Death/achievement – all

3.            New principle of classification: emotion/senses evoked from monuments:

Sadness/Loss

Achievement/recognition

Gratefulness

Eerie

1.       Martin Luther King, Jr., War in Afghanistan, People who gave their lives on 9/11 (not just the Twin Towers) – not represented in the nation’s capitol.

To commemorate MLK, a statue or symbol of black oppression would be appropriate.

To commemorate the War in Afghanistan, a structure that lists numbers of troops, supplies, and families that the war used/changed.

To commemorate 9/11—a recreation of the firemen or police offers, something that suggests turmoil and chaos, but rebirth as well.

2.       Characteristics—recognition to those people and events that changed our nation’s course of action and future. There are many more figures, other than presidents, and many more events that helped shape our nation that ought to be memorialized.

3.       N/A

1.       The United States likes to memorialize huge events that most of the population remembers or wants to remember. Sometimes that includes horrific events—not just positive presidents that bettered our nation. We wish to remember the struggle that got us to where we are now. They are deemed worthy of memorializing because of the perseverance in the face of opposition and their ground-breaking results as either people or events.

2.       The size of the monuments will show future generations that the US is proud of its achievements while also regretful and respectful to those who gave their lives to the greater cause of the nation. They will come to understand that honor is mostly done on a large-scale, so that everyone understands its force and mark it has left on our country.

3.       I believe that the United States should erect a monument in honor of our forefathers who wrote the Declaration of Independence. Without them and their efforts, we would not be here today. There ought to be something dedicated to the risky and brave efforts that they made when drafting such a then controversial constitution. The monument would fit into the group commemorating the achievements of our nation and past presidents. It should be some sort of recreation of those who were present at the convention where they wrote the document. It would be great to recreate the setting so that students could understand and visualize how it happened.

4.       Classification has helped to think about the bigger picture—about why certain monuments are created and what they represent. I also used patterns of inquiry such as cause and effect and ethos.

1.       I think that Centennial Park is a great place to build another memorial. I consider the Parthenon and the statues inside of it a memorial, but I believe that the park is big enough to house something that represents a different set of ideals. I’m not sure what would go there, but it would make sense for it to have something to do with democracy and the 100^th anniversary of our nation. Perhaps some aspect of government that we adopted from the ancient Greeks.

2.       Another form of collective consciousness that is shared among large groups is pride. People are often proud of different things, different aspects of their lives. But there is also a sense of national pride—pride of our government, pride of our troops, pride of our religions. Perhaps this idea of personal and national pride could be further explored.

JOAN DIDION essay

Georgia O’Keefe Essay

By Joan Didion

Page 165

1. In these first two paragraphs, Didion tried to do two things—to describe Georgia O’Keefe as an artist but to also, separately describe her artwork. The author touches on the difficulties of viewing art and remaining objective. Also, she notes that, even though her daughter has fallen in love with the airy, expansive depiction of a perfect sky, the artist should not be identified with the emotions found in the art. Didion explains that O’Keefe was a “hard” woman—not necessarily a happy-go-lucky, nature loving type that one might assume when viewing her art. Furthermore, the author says that there is a conflict between the images of O’Keefe and the work she produces.

2. In her essay, I feel that Didion uses O’Keefe’s art to forge a bridge between O’Keefe and the men. The “men” are seen as the ones who harass her and tell her she cannot be an artist. They are the ones who set the standards and barriers that O’Keefe consistently tears down by means of her art. Her art acts as the bridge between the two and acts as proof that she can paint just as they say is impossible.

3. Didion gives substance to her claims by juxtaposing the men and O’Keefe. The men serve as the goal that O’Keefe strives for. She strives to complete the tasks that they deem impractical. The quote about the flowers that she paints shows that O’Keefe does not want people to interpret her flowers as their own idea of flowers. She wants to be independent in style as well as thought.

4. Annotated in text

1.  Didion uses very concise and direct sentences to talk about the early life of Georgia O’Keefe. She also uses repetition, which helps the reader to read quickly through the passage, evoking a sense of rhetorical movement and implying a fast pace. She beings most sentences with “at fill-in-the-blank location or age”.

2. The last paragraph about O’Keefe in Texas tells us that she was certain of what she wanted. She wanted to live in Texas because there, “no one could tell her how not to paint” (164). Also, the idea of her “walking away from the town” symbolizes her aversion to the men of New York. The vast, open landscape of Texas is directly contrasted with the hustle and bustle of New York City.

3.            Dear Georgia,

I respect your statement that claims that when people view your images of flowers, they include their own associations of flowers. And I agree with you that it is unfair, from an artists’ standpoint, to assume certain notions about a piece of art because the viewer already has certain personal opinions. But, I must admit that I find it very difficult to view art with a totally unbiased, free of our own associations approach. I think that we interact with so many different subjects and experiences that our mind can never truly lack our own associations. I think people should strive to do what you encourage—people should strive to see a piece of art as it really is, but I do not think it is possible for someone without training.

Tell Alfred hello.

Sincerely,

Anna

Frames of Mind--Ways of Seeing (And Not): An Occasion for Description

Essay by E.M. Forster
pages 146-149

1.       I think there are a lot of people who have trouble looking—and I mean really looking at a piece of art. It is hard not to let the mind wander. It is hard to prohibit your imagination from transporting you to a new scene. I believe it is important to be able to look at a piece and understand it for its visual components and effects. But I also believe that a successful work causes the viewer to feel other emotions, to grapple with ideas that are inspired by the image. After so many art history courses, I have trouble looking at a painting or sculpture and not conducting a mental visual analysis. Sometimes I wish that I had no idea what to  look for and could view art in a naïve, alien way.

2.       Both Mauron and Fry are distinguished critics of some sort. Therefore, they are the type of people whose minds do NOT wander when viewing art. I think the author, Forster, uses them to contrast his own experiences. They also serve to show that there is some fun to be had in viewing art. When they are both in the gallery, laughing and talking about what they see, it demonstrates a less-serious, less-strict side of looking at art.

3.       I was very interested in Forster’s description of Las Meninas. I was intruiged to read about his “waves” and “half-waves” that he sees when viewing the image. In his description of the masterpiece, he uses positive diction—words such as “adorable,” “party,” “casual,” and “Kodak.” For the somewhat mysterious piece with somber colors, Forster really lightens it up. He makes the reader want to see the piece for themselves to either agree or disagree with his observations.

1.       When Forster approaches a painting, if he can keep his mind from taking charge and going off on some alternate path, he first looks at the composition. He searches for some sort of diagonal that helps him get his bearing for viewing. But he is also easily distracted by the content (i.e. the dinosaur). Most often, this is what he is drawn to even before the diagonals. He also takes note of the colors, but has a hard time focusing on them unless they stand out in a dramatic sense, like the cherries that he mentions. When Fry views a painting, he makes certain to observe the composition and take note of the structural significance it has. He notes balance and scale, as well.

2.       Esthetic—“concerning or characterized by an appreciation of beauty or good taste, a philosophical theory as to what is beautiful.” I don’t believe his claim that he has no “esthetic aptitude.” I think everyone is capable of discerning what they believe to be beautiful. It is simply a matter of exercise and use. If you work on it and view art often and talk about what you see and how it makes you feel, you become more comfortable with it and further develop it. Fry, for example, is in a field which requires him to constantly judge art, undoubtedly employing his own perceptions of beauty/esthetics.

3. In response to Forster’s last claim, I agree with him. I believe that when someone chooses not to view art, the only “goal” that remains is to “not look at art.” But when someone does want to view art, when someone chooses to look, the looking opens up enumerable doors in the mind for interpretation and understanding. A good example is the artwork of Jackson Pollock (shown below). 

Jackson Pollock, No. 5, 1948.

   This is a fairly intimidating piece of art to study. Those who choose not to look at it, lose all chances of better comprehending something about it—the style in which it was made, information about the artist, the emotions evoked by the colors, etc. But for those who do not fear it, they are led to a wide range of goals. They have a multitude of ways to interpret it. They might find that they want to try painting for themselves. Or they might learn what they like and don’t like in the realm of art. But at least they are choosing to look.