Romanticism or the Enlightenment

                                                                        Romanticism

             Throughout the last few years I have come to realize that I am a solid revolutionary. I question authority, the news media (as I was advised by the forefathers of this very country), and ultimately anything that has the potential to indoctrinate or infiltrate my mind through the means of propaganda. I have lost total faith and trust in government along with the media. I stress the media essentially because four or five major corporations have consolidated the ways and means in which your "media" or "news" reaches your television. Not more than thirty years ago there were a pleathora of news corporations that held no allegiance with the major four or five. 
                      The consolidation of news and media has been a key resource for the misinformation that is fed and easily consumed by the American People. Additionally, the federal government regulates one hundred percent of what is transmitted through your television, only strengthening their indoctrinating agenda. Thomas Jefferson stated "A man who reads nothing at all is much better educated than a man who reads nothing but newspapers." Translated to our time, a man who doesn't have a television is much better educated or informed than the man who watches nothing but regulated television. 
                      Through this successful process of misinformation we now live in a society where the individual is much more offended by swear words or middle fingers, than by the constant death and destruction  of innocent human beings abroad. I consider myself somewhat of a product of Romanticism (however I try not to put limitatitions on my mind in anyway shape or form, ie Republican vs. Democrat, Realist vs. Liberal, Communist vs. Capitalist, Conservative vs. Liberal etc.) because I am all about rebellion, the true power of the individual over the group, and ultimately the importance of this human experience through the lens of spiritual nature, rather than religion. We as individuals are sadly pitted against one another through these limitations and chains we voluntarily revered.

Bernini and the Baroque

Bernini’s sculpture of David resembles the point at which people really made the leap from the Classical period into the Baroque. The traditional sculpting was left in the dust, and the new, engaging, interesting, imperfect sculptures were left to thrive. The limiting chains of the Classical period were released and never to be thought of again. Berninis sculpture resembles intriguing emotion and engaging physical activity. The viewers are obligated to walk around the sculpture, simply interested in whats happening in the back, and what exactly was laying on the ground behind David. This sculpture expresses certain facial expressions absent in both the renaissance and the Classical period. The classical and the renaissance both emulated the standard frontward faced, upright, blank expression statues which could be swallowed whole by the simple glance from the front, there was no driving force provoking the viewer to walk around or engage with the statue. Bernini’s sculpture brought to life either the actual image or idea of David, he gave a specific face to David, relating this historic figure to anyone and everyone who stands in front of this sculpture. This was the specific moment in which the surface was completely broken of the Classical influence, and not just scratched as the renaissance completed. The wonderful possibilities of art and expression were finally let loose with Bernini’s sculpture of David, people finally realized that there wasn’t a “standard” way to sculpt, and if so the “standard” way wasn’t the best way to express themselves. The Baroque also brought with it the over clothing of the sculptures, the objects of the sculpture were essentially drowned in there clothes requiring the viewer to closely examine the sculpture, solidifying the claim that the Baroque engaged the viewers into the artwork. This claim didn’t only pertain to sculptures, but also artwork as well. Even the paintings of the Baroque provided new perspectives of the events that were portrayed in the classical and renaissance periods. This was one of the most crucial transitions humans completed in our entire history. 

Who was David? Michelangelo and Donetello Possess Contradicting Illustrations

             The book states Michelangelo's David finely illustrates Appollonian classicism, while Donatello's David illustrates a portion of the renaissance labeled passionate individualism. I firmly believe these statues are perfectly labeled with the books assertions. Michelangelo's david articulately resembles the sculptures found in the classical period. They articulate the human bodies perfection, Davids pristine figure solidifies this claim. The "S" shape is prevalent in a few circumstances in Michelangelo's David, traveling from the left side of his face illuminating the body of the "S" with his pelvic area, down through his left leg.

            On the contrary, Donetello's David appears to be a statue illuminating something entirely novel in the ceramic world. As our natural ability can easily detect, David is distictly made of black clay. He's also wearing a hat, holding onto what appears to be a weapon of some sort. Donetello didn't branch out as far to absolutely extinguish the "S" curve from the statue, it's easily recognizable. The passionate individualism is very well illustrated in this sculpture, as Donetello essentially introduced a completely new David. He left the classical sculpting customs in the dust, and distinctly sculpted his vision of David as he wanted. In essence, Donetello broke free from the chains of the classical world, he introduced novel elements in the realm of sculpting, and changed the course proceeding sculpters would follow forever.
            An important element of these two sculptures and how they reflect the renaissance is that these two sculptures are completely foils of eachother. Another important note to take here is that when I think about the renaissance I dont think of one image in particular, rather I imagine humanity in a state of constant war, constant uneccessary human suffering, and a bunch of talented people performing some serious soul searching. The expression of art during the renaissance reflected humanity in a state of curiousity, artists such as Donetello were sick and tired of the status quo, they were the select few that entirely understood that there must be a better way the humans of the world can express themselves.

A Knights Tale

             A Knights Tale is a modern-day movie depicting a very interesting time in world history. The most memorable segment of this movie was when Heath Ledger discovered his master Sir Ector had died. He then convinces himself to steal the jousting armor, and catapult himself into the upper-class. In the medieval times the poverty class was almost destined to live in poverty their entire lives. The greatest element of this choice was the fact that William Thatcher didn't make this decision purely to benefit his own self interest, he and his two loyal friends were just as important, as they all split the earnings. He then continues to compete in tournaments, and becomes quite successful. In his pursuit he becomes infatuated with a woman of the upper-class, this proves to be difficult, as William is really a member of the lower-class, pretending to be of royalty. Great movie depicting the medieval times, especially since this is after all a glamoured facade produced in Hollywood.

How do we look?

          "In a decaying society, art, if it is truthful, must also reflect decay. And unless it wants to break faith with it's social function, art must show the world as changeable. And help to change it." - Earnst Fischer

      With this quote in mind, where is our society now? Are we a society built on independent muscular civil structure, or is our strength dependent on the governments of the world? Are we morally superior to the generations before, or are we morally inferior? These are questions I ask myself quite frequently, and for good reason. When I think of art, sadly the first category that I think about is music. Music is a hegemon with regard to the generation I'm a part of and our exposure to art. We do have good music, loaded with lyrics that have positive sentimental messages; however, if you turn on the radio to the "mainstream" stations, we don't have much hope now do we? With rappers and hip-hop artists dominating most of the air-time, whose lyrics often are hollow and defeaning to the educated mind, our society wouldn't look very good, or intelligent. If we are a society built on intelligence, and prosperity, why are we widely accepting artists whose lyrics contain derogatory terms belittling women, patronizing money and advocating drug use? Again, this isn't all of the music, but my generation glorifies  artists like,"Lil' Wayne","Lady GaGa" or the newer "Ke$ha". To me, we're in a period of social decay almost comparable to that of the time of the Gladiators, where citizens of the roman empire laughed and found pleasure in the "glorifying" death of the gladiators. now, the younger generations are finding pleasure in patronizing unnecessary human suffering(drugs), glorifying slavery (money, federal reserve system) and the absolute belittling of women. Although I have exposed much evidence against my generation and generations to come, I have significant hope we can overcome this embarrassing period of time.

Drunk on Wine, Poetry, or Virtue?

             It was inevitable, I was going to relate to this poem, all I had to do was read it. This poem strikes me in so many different ways. First of all, throughout our lives we are basically taught to conform, to obey all authority. This occurs from the time we first recall, up until the day we begin asking questions once again, the real tragedy is when we stop questioning things forever. This poem speaks of "the burden of time bending you to the earth, you have to continually be drunk." However time is only a burden when wasted, and we tend to always be worrying about how much time we have, until we have no more. The key to this, which is very well illustrated throughout the poem, is to have passion, forget the unnecessary worries of the world, and do exactly what you love to do. Find what makes the day feel whole in the absence of time, after all a watched clock ticks much slower.
              This poem poses the question "Drunk on Wine, Poetry, or Virtue?" then states it doesn't matter, just choose one or any of them. Essentially it's not relevant what your substance (passion) is, it's much more important that your drunk, or overflowing with passion. Passion has the tendency to blind us of our troubles. I would love to go to Law School one day and thoroughly study Constitutional Law, if I wasn't passionate about this I could easily talk myself out of it, otherwise let the pressures of the world dictate what I was going to do for the rest of my life. Starting with how much money is involved with seven or eight years of school, how long it would take me to repay my student loans, the passion I possess for this career helps me overcome these obstacles mentally. We must be more focused on what we love and what we love to do, or our entire lives will be consumed and negated by the pressures imposed on our life by the outside world.