THE HOLY GRAIL!

Two of our three classes this week pertained to just that.. the holy grail.  Overall, I thought the movie was pretty hilarious.  The director and writer took such serious subject matter and made it almost riduculous.  The setting and props were easy.  The actors seemed fairly low budget, but they did a very good job.  We grew up hearing stories of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table.. but the stories and usual movies were much different than the one we watched this week.  Their epic journey had many twists and bumps along the way, but each pit stop just added to the laughter :)

In a perfect world, maybe..

Personally, I really dig Voltaire's whole satirical approach.  He parodies three main topics:  fatalism, Christian orthodoxy, and schisms.  I really liked his view on the Garden of Eden.  So many of the texts we have been reading have been serious views.  Voltaire was kind of like a breath of fresh air.  He makes everything seem less intense and more funny.  For example, his name of Eve - Cunegonde - I thought was hilarious.  I thought this was the perfect time in the semester to read this book.  As the end of the year is nearing, we needed a less deep story to read and one that we could really understand. 

Ro-co-co (co-co)

It's just kind of fun to say.  I feel like I could keep adding co-co's and it would just get more fun.  Or it would turn itself into a song.  Okay.. maybe not.  But seriously.
I can't decide if I dig Rococo work or not.  The architecture really just isn't my style.  It's too gaudy and excessive.  I like ivy, but I like real ivy, you know, outside - alive - green.  Granted, these people may not have liked the style either, they just wanted to show off their wealth.  I guess if you've got it, flaunt it?  The Rococo painting was very different also.  I did like the fact that the painting wasn't necessarily serious though.  All of the paintings we have been looking at have been so deeper meaning and all that jazz.  Rococo is just erotic, overly sentimental subject matter.  It is kind of nice to look at a painting and not tear it apart - either they just got it in or they're about to get it in.  Very simple.  I've often wondered if all of these books and paintings maybe don't have deep meanings, and as a curious being we simply assign possible meanings to all of these different works.  Maybe the artist was tripping and just drew what he wanted to.  Who knows.  But my stance on Rococo (cocococo) remains the same, comme ci commme ca.
Until next Sunday...

Oh the benefits of going to class..

First and foremost, I am super excited that I do not have to do my second cultural critique.  Apparently attending class can pay off.. and the discussion my group had on Alexander Pope was also intriguing.  His viewpoint on man not needing to know the workings of what is above him made so much sense.  When individuals question God's purpose, which happens frequently, the idea can be somewhate disturbing.  However, Pope just trusts in God's workings.  He believes we don't need to understand what God's intentions are, and that we simply need to trust him.  God knows what he is doing, and we don't need to question the motives or meaning behind any of it.  In his words, "Whatever is, is right."

how about we work with those emotions?

That's what we are.  Emotional beings.  We have feelings, oh yes we have feelings, so why not manipulate those feelings through art?  Catholic Baroque Art did just that, appealed to our emotions as human beings.  This completely went against all aspects of art up until that point, which focused on ideal order.  This new form of art was off balance, went against realism, and warped space.  A main focus within the paintings were the light and dark contrasts.  Another key feature within these works was that a lot of the action was happening in the background - woah, curveball!  When observing this new style of art, the goal was to feel the same emotions as the artist.  However, being Catholic, all of these artworks went through the doctrines of the church.  This new style of artwork, honestly, is kind of scary.  Some of the details in the paintings we observed were almost to the point of spooky, if you ask me.  Then again, you probably didn't :)
Until next time..

i feel like if i title this 'to be or not to be' i will be beating a dead horse..

In class last week, majority of time was spent watching Hamlet.  I had read the play in my AP English class in high school, and to be quite honest the content is very intriguing.  When you actually make sense out of the jumble of words Shakespeare presents, his words make sense.  As a matter of fact, sometimes the guy is hilarious.  I believe watching this play helps point out humorous or tragic lines.  When watching Mel Gibson perform and put feeling into his words, it is easier to understant what exactly Shakespeare is trying to get across.  Because of this, I belive that watching the movie in class is vital in order to understand Hamlet.

is it ever as simple as it sounds?

Dr. Tucker asked us all a very important question: "If we could live our exact life over again, up until this point, would we?"  Would we change anything, do we have regrets, what would you do differently?  When I contemplated this question, I found myself having a shouting match inside my head.  To say the least, the offer is very tempting.  Knowing what I know now, I could turn around my choices.  I could fix the mistakes and errors I made in the past, and I could get what I wanted.  Correction - what I think I wanted.  Let's just say the logical half of me won the argument.  If I were to change my past, who's to say I would like the outcome?  Or that that one change could lead to other changes, and I wouldn't like who I was?  The point is, I like where I am now.  Even through all the terrible choices I have made in my past, they got me here.  One small change could change where I am now - who knows, I could have died.  One different turn or word would change everything.  And let's be honest, who wants that? Well.. some people.  But not this girl.

Who's to Blame?

Society or the individual?  When discussing Utopia, we really took a present day look at the matter Raphael was trying to dissect.  Personally, I feel as though the individual plays a greater role than society.  Granted, society decides what is right and wrong.  Ultimately, however, the individual chooses which path to take.  Just because society says something is right, an individual could have varying morals.  However, society molds an individual's morals.  I believe this debate goes back and forth, making it difficult to choose a side.  Discussion in class about these issues was extremely interesting.  I love the way Dr. Tucker took the subject matter from the reading and related it to current events and beliefs.  What I love more, on the other hand, is this Spring Break :)

Let's Not Make This Awkward..

Because I am Catholic; However, I always find it very interesting to learn of my religion's past.  This reason being one of the reasons I find this class interesting - so far, everything ties to Catholicism in some way.  And, even though we talked about the split on Monday, it all brings us right back to where we started.  About that split.. the (with passion) Protestant Reformation.. psst, apparently it was more of a schism. We talked about the Church's problems - greed, worldly political power, controversy over sale of indulgences.. and the list goes on and on.  Basically, as with any reformation, everything is a problem.  I found the controversy over the sales of indulgences to be quite intriguing.  Actually, the whole concept of indulgences is bewildering.  Granted, the Pope has extreme power - but to sign off on someone forever?  What happened to forgiveness?  I didn't live during this time, so the whole idea kind of escapes me.. And to sale indulgences?  Especially for dead people?  C'mon.  That just sounds wrong when you say it.  Again, I wouldn't understand.  So I know the Church had problems, who doesn't?  And who knows, maybe the Protestant Reformation is the best thing to ever happen to us.  But, what would the world be like if there was religious unity?  I guess we will never know..
Until next time.

Not East, West, or South.. but Northern Renaissance.

When I think of Renaissance, I tend to think of Italy.  The artists and individuals you tend to hear about during this time period are Italian, which would lead to the generalization.  However, this week in class focused on a Renaissance occuring in another part on the compass, which was in the North.  Albrecht Dürer was somewhat of a phenomenom.  His art and meaning behind his work spoke wonders to the Renaissance occuring around him.  I found his self portraits to be exceptionally mind boggling - the way he painted himself straight on and to appear like Christ was a very career changing painting.  Another aspect of this Renaissance I found to be extremely intriguing was the concept of printing materials.  It never occured to me that these artists only had one original painting, to which only one individual purchased.  In today's society, prints are found all over the world.  In the days of Albrecht Dürer, however, this idea was only first developing.  The printing of his paintings defined him as an artist, an idea that was new at the time.  However, I am extremely please these printings were created and duplicated - otherwise, Starry Night by van Gogh would not be hanging above my bed as we speak :)

A Day in the Life of a Medici..

I cannot decide if being born a Medici is either a doom or a destiny.  I mean, it only takes a smidge of blood, apparently, to change your life forever.  I keep thinking how the power of a last name isn't the same as it used to be.  What would be the closest to modern Medici's?  The Kennedy's?  Each Medici's life has been laced with good luck and bad luck, and it seems that it doesn't matter the order.  How in the heck can one family go through so much?  However, I think that Cosimo de'Medici is really something.  To be pulled from a simple life and be expected to be a duke?  C'mon.  The fact is, most people would fail with this task.  Maybe it's the Medici blood in him.  I don't know.  Either way, he pulled it off.  I loved the way he and the other man restored the hand to the statue of David.  Not only wa it a symbol for something long lost, but it also helped establish the way in which Cosimo was going to lead Florence.  And because of this, Cosimo wins my vote for fave Medici.  Granted I don't know all of the Medici's, and only an odd few, he beats the others I know.  I thoroughly enjoyed the Medici videos we watched during this course.  They were some of my favorite movies I've ever watched for school.  I almost enjoyed them as much as I enjoyed my Friday in the sun :)
Until next time..

Medici

In class last week, we watched a video about the Medici family in Italy.  Wow, talk about a crazy life.  To go from being exiled to being the Pope - can it get any more drastic that that?  I am mostly Italian, so it was very interesting to learn a little history about Italy.  It seemed as if the Medici's were a big deal in Italy for quite some time.  As far as Pope-ness goes, maybe Leo didn't have the right qualities.  He liked to party and be popular, who can blame the guy?  Well, besides the fact this "guy" was the Pope, I guess I can understand why the Cardinal's got so fussy.  But to go as far as plan a secret murder?  The video said that the Cardinal's devised a plan to murder Leo, but what I was wondering was if his cousin, being a Cardinal, knew about the plan and that's who told Leo about it.  I mean, it makes sense, right?  And did he really have a stand-in to get murdered instead?  I always imagine what it would be like to live during those times.  Your Pope, who you used to despise, is throwing a never ending party in the Vatican, and then he dies.  From a cold.  Bummer. 
I really wish we could have finished the video, or started from the beginning.  The story line was extremely interesting, especially with the story of the artists during that time period thrown in the mix.  I will be excited to read more of The Prince, which I would like to read from a satirical stand point.
Until next time..

What to paint..

Painting.  Well, seems like all you need are some brushes, or not.  Well you definitely need a canvas.. or not.  However, you do need pant.. yes, certainly paint.  Alberti went beyond the basics of simply painting a picture.  Before reading On Painting, I had no clue how much time and work is supposed to go into painting a picture.  Although some do not follow Alberti's style of painting, to him only great painters did.  It seemed like there was only one step to painting a picture:   paint it.  After reading his work, however, he described three very definitive steps:  circumscription, composition, and reference to light.  His words described each aspect in great detail (which means I was lost through a good portion of the book), but after meeting in class each part became somewhate clearer.  Little did I know, painting a picture requires much more than what I thought it did.

The Black What? Oh yeah, Death.

Alright, so not really the type of topic to be joking about; and cmon, how could anyone actually forget about a disease that wiped out Europe?  Especially when we've been singing out it since we were kids, "Ring around the rosie.."  (some might argue its origins, but it makes the Plague so much creepier, don't you think?)  I found our class periods discussing the Bubonic Plague extremely interesting.  As a man said during the videos we watched, sometimes he tries to imagine what it would be like to live during that time.  First of all, everyone around you would be dying.  When sixty percent of the population is dead, your chances are not very good.  Some might say they would not abandon their sick family and leave, but given the circumstances, you might not act exactly like you think you would.  I like to believe I would stick it out, but even just thinking about it gives me the heebie jeebies.  Secondly, everything you grew up to believe would be put in a blender and messed around.  Your life would change in the matter of seconds, and you're just supposed to be okay about it?  Today, we criticize the way the Europeans acted, but get real - you'd probably do it too.  Their spirituality and belief system was shattered.  I don't know, maybe they were a little crazy.  For sure, I'd blame whoever I could but myself if I were in the situation, but the Jews?  Let's be honest, haven't they been through enough?  Granted, they took whatever leads they could and tried to make things better.. what can we say, they had heart?  Nah, they just lived in a different time period.  We can't say we would do this or that, and we can't say we wouldn't blame the Jews (okay, we probably wouldn't), but I know for a fact we can't predict how we would act.  Let's just hope we'll never have to find out :)
Until next time...