Walker and Barrett Articles

In Walkers article Big Idea, I thought the comment that many artists seem to include objects that would not normally be used together or in a painting in general come together to form a bigger idea. I have never really looked at art in that way, but now knowing this, some artwork would make more sense. I especially liked the example of Andy Warhol. I never knew the true meaning behind his soup can paintings, but know I understand why he painted what he did -to stretch the boundaries of art, which is perfect because that is what the theme of this article is.

What I found difficult in this article was that some of Walker's explanations used to portray this idea of a bigger idea were confusing in themselves. I feel that if Walker really wanted to convey his message clearer he should have elaborated further on some of his thoughts.

I really enjoyed reading Barrett’s article Visual Culture.  I found the observation about most preschoolers having a stuffed teddy bear very interesting. It is weird that out of all the animals, the teddy bear is the most popular. Bears are normally scary, but maybe it is the fact that you can hold and cuddle a teddy bear unlike real bears that makes them so appealing. It reminds me of the movie Ted. Even as we grow older we keep our stuffed animals because they become a friend to us.

I found this article very interesting, but I think that it could have been improved with more graphics. After all the article was about how we see things. The end examples included many pictures, but the first couple of pages relied on descriptions. Pictures for these descriptions would have added a lot to the article.

Kidd, Hickey and Weschler Articles Examined

In the article by Kidd, The Cheese Monkeys I thought the authors view on givens were quite accurate. It comes as a given that left is greater than right, up is of more importance than down and big is more important than small. We do not even think about it. When we want something to have more importance we without thinking use the greater direction or size.

What I find troubling is why we view things in this way. The question that should be asked is how did this come to be? Who decided that one direction or size is of more importance than another and why do we follow this set decision? Are we not capable of our own decisions? The fact is that we can be lazy and not question decisions as we should. What makes left more important than right? Is it the fact that we are afraid of change? This is something to think hard about.

In the article by Hickey, The Heresy of Zone Defense set rules are looked at further in the sport of basketball. It is interesting to note how much the rules of basketball have changed over the years. This is for the better, because it makes the game fairer and leaves little room for argument.

A negative that comes from these rules though is who is chosen to play the sport. We do not just look at athleticism any more but who will be able to win for our team based on size.  This can take away from the fun nature of the game and make it too competitive. Lots of high school sports these days are no longer fun because of this constant competition to be better than your teammates. Isn’t the point of team sports to work together as a team and have fun? I feel as though this aspect has been lost with the creation of more rules.

It is intriguing that the human face is capable of over 5,000 different expressions as stated in Weschler’s article Uncanny Valley. This capability is golden for the movie industry and they never miss the chance to use it to their advantage. Today even animated characters have these 5,000 expressions and plus some.

What is troubling though is how much the movie industry has changed. They are not just sticking with human actors anymore but they have now created animations and robots to take the place of human actors. It may be good entertainment but there comes a point where you have to ask is it worth it? Actors are losing jobs to non-human characters and money is instead being spent on creating facial expressions that any human can already do. Would it not be easier to use humans? Of course you lose the entertainment factor of creating unheard of animations that keep the audience enthralled, but would it not be more logical to think of new ways to make real humans even more interesting to watch? That seems like a better investment to me.

About Me

My name is Rachel Johnson and I am a third year at the Ohio State University. I am currently a double major in German and International Studies with a focus on Western European studies. I am involved in many activities on campus including, Delta Zeta Sorority, Ohio State Sportsmanship Council, Intramurals and I am in the Biological Sciences Scholars Program. I originally started off as a Biology, premed major but after studying abroad in Dresden, Germany after my freshman year I decided it was not for me. I have travelled to a lot of major cities in Germany (Berlin, Munich, Frankfurt, Bremen to name a few) and have also been to Prague. I have been taking German classes since my freshman year in High School and it is something I truly love. I babysit in Upper Arlington a couple of days a week and I also recently started working for the Upper Arlington School district at their after school care program. As you can tell I love kids. This has to do with growing up with three younger sisters back home in Chagrin Falls, Ohio. You learn responsibility at an early age. Some of my interests include country music (I am a big Kenny Chesney fan), the show Covert Affairs (I've always liked a good mystery), soccer (I've been playing since I was in pre-school), dance (ballet and jazz) and I love to read (I just recently finished reading the third book in the Girl with the Dragon Tattoo trilogy.) I am easy going and love to meet new people!