One of the things that has really struck me this year, especially in reference to postmodern art, is the ability to express the cultural climate surrounding it, and sometimes be an advocate to make it better. I found this especially evident in some of the architecture we have studied. For example, modernist architecture began as an effort to build democratic, unassuming structures that placed all within them on a supposedly equal level. It was begun by socialist architects and designers in Europe, and was called the International Style. The plain, geometric nature of this style is effective at wiping away signals of class or wealth that are evident in much of the architecture that preceded it. One of the American offshoots to this style was conceived by Buckminster Fuller. His design for geodesic domes was touted as an energy-efficient and very democratic. Fuller had hoped that his building designs would usher in a new age of progress and equality. Unfortunately, the prospective benefits of this and other modernist styles eventually ended up becoming the face of capitalism in America.
The Postmodern reaction to Modernist architecture does not advertise itself as world changing or progress. Rather it can be seen as a reflection of the ideals and mindsets that permeate society at any given point. Postmodern architecture tries to incorporate elements from surrounding cultural or natural sources, which makes it very much a conduit representing the world around it. This makes the architecture very appealing, aesthetically and thematically, to people who view it. Michael Graves is one of the more noted postmodern architects, and his works are noted for their radical eclectic style that excellently incorporate the surrounding culture. An example is his "Denver Central" which shows direct connections to the surrounding mountainous region, as well as the prominent mining community in the area. This style has ironically become more democratic because it doesn't try to make all people everywhere equal, but in a unique move gives each region the chance to have its own identity expressed through architecture.
When we started the discussion in class about abstract art, I was sure that I could never understand or appreciate it. There are still some forms of abstract art that I don't appreciate, and probably never will. However, I have come to an appreciation of a view artists and their unique styles. I especially like Jackson Pollock and Mark Rothko. Their styles are completely different, but both of them have an almost organic feel to them which is very appealing to me. Also, neither is trying to make a statement with their art, but both rather leave it open for the viewer to interpret, which is a very democratic and fair way to present art.
Pollock's style is impressive to me because of the amazing balance he is able to achieve in his paintings. When I first encountered his style, I was not impressed, because it seemed to me that even a small child could drip paint on a canvas and call it art. Upon further investigation, though, I found that the different colors and patterns of paint are extremely well balanced in all of his paintings. To achieve that kind of balance must take some measure of calculation, despite the intended randomness of the style. His style is also appealing because of its fluid nature. The paint almost seems to have a lifelike movement to it, which is very inviting to the viewer as well. In short, I have learned to appreciate the depth and complexity of Pollock's work.
Rothko is another that at first I didn't find very impressive. It seemed like his plain blocks of color were useless both aesthetically and thematically. As I started to learn more about them, however, I came to a similar conclusion as I had with Pollocks paintings. I had the opportunity to try making a parody of a color field painting using charcoal. I found that the edges of Rothko's color fields were difficult to duplicate. Like Pollock's, his edges have an almost organic feel to them, making the color blocks seem almost like simplified landscapes. Having experienced to a small degree the creative process to this form of art, I now find his paintings peaceful and comfortable. They are natural in a way that is very relaxing to me. I have enjoyed getting to know more about abstract art, and going through the process of opening my mind a little to art forms that I don't understand very well. In the future, this experience will help me not to judge things before I come to understand them.
This song has always been one of my favorites. It has a very whimsical sound that draws you in as soon as you hear the first notes on the radio. The music has a certain quality that evokes strong emotions in the listener. When I listen to the music, it's almost like sitting under a moonlit sky with someone special. The music is moving because it is so dynamic. This is not a cookie cutter romantic hit. Rather it changes keys several times, swooping up and down along the scale, almost symbolic of the ups and downs that come with being in love and sustaining a relationship.
Having some background knowledge about how this song was “reborn” so to say, helps me understand a little about the emotion that Mama Cass gives to the music, and why her version is seen as the most popular version. Knowing that the group decided to do the song when they heard about the death of one of the writers shows the that the emotional connection that an artist has to the work can come through in the music. The added fact that Cass Elliot herself died young, just two days after performing this song, gave the piece some added meaning. The connection that the commentators made between the song and the deaths of people surrounding it brought up images of death and dreaming that gives extra layers to the song. Now when I listen to the song, I think of the writer and the singer who are themselves “dreaming a little dream.”
The analysis of the song by the commentators draws upon those events for most of their commentary, with only minimal attention to the music itself or the cultural significance of the work. While it is true that America is a nation of individuals, I would have liked to hear a little more about what makes this work significant to American culture, rather than the extensive individual history that they presented. The failure of the commentators to do so seemed to take away some of the importance of the song as a significant American work.
Fire and Rain: James Taylor
Fire and Rain is a sad song that always seems to resonate with me. It is a powerful commentary on the importance of living with purpose, rather than procrastinating things that are really important. As humans we always expect that there will be another day, another opportunity to see our friends and right our wrongs, but often those opportunities never come. This song poignantly points out this sad truth, but still there is a feeling of hope and brightness about it that contradicts the meaning of the words. You come away from listening to it with a good feeling, like you've reached closure with some of your problems.
Before I listened to the NPR presentation of this song, I was unaware of the background of the three verses. Now that I understand partly the feelings James Taylor was experiencing at the time, I can see why this song is so powerful to him as an individual and to so many others. I thought it was interesting when Taylor talked about how the experience changes for him based on the audience's involvement in the song. The audience has to receive the song and be connected with it for him to maintain the emotional connection that he had when he wrote it. I think that says a lot about why this song is significant, because it really brings out some powerful connections to the American audience.
Overall, I liked how this song was presented. It really highlighted the artists' involvement and care in creating a song that could move the American public. In the interview with Taylor, he mentioned several times that making a song is a communal effort, and that his songs are shaped by the emotional and political aspects of the surrounding culture. For this reason I think that Fire and Rain is a significant American song because it reflects the communal gathering of emotions, cultures, and circumstances. It is an important observation as well that not only do the people of the country help define the music, but the music in a lot of ways defines and shapes the people who listen to it.
Sittin' on the Dock of the Bay: Otis Redding
When I first listened to “Sittin' on the Dock of the Bay,” I didn't really listen to the words very closely. I liked the sound of the music, but I didn't see much merit to the words. It seemed almost like some lazy guy complaining and wasting time away, instead of living an active and engaging life. I listened to a few other Otis Redding songs, and they seemed to be similarly morose and somewhat depressing, but always with an upbeat sound. The contrast between sad words and upbeat music is an interesting expression of optimism, but it is effective in its purpose.
Listening to the circumstances that surrounded the making of the song enforced the point that this song was meant to be optimistic in spite of lonely or depressing situations. I thought that Otis' good spirit and frequent jokes highlighted this point. He may not be able to change his circumstances, or fulfill every order that comes his way, but he will stay strong and firm in his own determination. In a way this is an anthem to all the people who think that they are stuck in a rut and that life is beating them down. For those people, this song says that your circumstances don't have to define you, but you can roll with the punches and keep going with life.
The presentation of “Sittin' on the Dock of the Bay” was effective in bringing out the points that I have mentioned. I would have liked, however, to see a little more of the historical background of the time period, and how Otis' songs both reflected his life and the circumstances of the times. The 1960's were filled with protests and struggles for many minority groups in the U.S., and it may have seemed to many like there efforts weren't doing much good, and this song may have been a catalyst that helped people to persevere and stick to their purpose.
One of the things that has really struck me this year, especially in reference to postmodern art, is the ability to express the cultural climate surrounding it, and sometimes be an advocate to make it better. I found this especially evident in some of the architecture we have studied. For example, modernist architecture began as an effort to build democratic, unassuming structures that placed all within them on a supposedly equal level. It was begun by socialist architects and designers in Europe, and was called the International Style. The plain, geometric nature of this style is effective at wiping away signals of class or wealth that are evident in much of the architecture that preceded it. One of the American offshoots to this style was conceived by Buckminster Fuller. His design for geodesic domes was touted as an energy-efficient and very democratic. Fuller had hoped that his building designs would usher in a new age of progress and equality. Unfortunately, the prospective benefits of this and other modernist styles eventually ended up becoming the face of capitalism in America. 
