Emotion and Intellect giacometti vs rodcheckow
There is a great difference in art between emotion and intellect. They are two completely separate elements. Art that is emotional tends to be stirring and raw- it provokes an immediate reaction in the viewer. Art that is intellectual is deeper, it requires thought and time to chew on- to comprehend. To be successful a piece of art must contain both elements. Both Alberto Giacometti’s Woman with Her Throat Cut and Alexadr Rodchenko’s Oval Hanging Construction No. 12 are successful pieces of art- but they contain the elements of emotion and intellect in vastly different proportions. Giacometti’s work is instantly stirring. It is abstract, yet the implications of the forms, especially when combined with the knowledge of the title are immediate. Its emotion speaks loudly and clearly. Rodchenko’s work is intellect all the way. The work is cleverly constructed- it is geometric analytical and very calculated. It explores and provokes the viewer in a very different way from that of Giacometti’s work.
The constructivists as a group were vastly different than the surrealists. The Constructivists analyzed, prodded, tested and assessed- while the surrealists seemed play and mess around- making art into a random act trying to hash out the unconscious. Rodchenko’s section in the constructivist “organization” was called the objective analysis group. The bases of the analysis were the structural elements and laws of composition used in the creation of a work. The effects of this return to the roots are clearly evident in Rodchenko’s spatial constructions.
The surrealists were doing their own investigation into the creative process. At surrealist meetings led chiefly by Breton, pseudo psychoanalytical questions were asked of the members- seemingly to help them to emphasize the role of the unconscious in their creative methods.
Giacometti’s work is not utilitarian- nor does it attempt to be attainable by the common people as Rodchenko’s work does. Woman With Her Throat Cut is a study in conflicting emotions. Giacometti himself states that the piece was based upon a need to “find a solution between things that were full and calm, and clear and violent” Giacometti goes on to state that part of the solution was to depict objects moving in opposite directions.
It lies on the floor, darkly disturbing in its implications. The woman lies bare- triangular forms suggesting a spine are open to the air.
DiLorenzo was very successful in writing this book, Alexander Marriott states that he “reached a relatively wide audience of libertarians and conservatives.”(Marriott) DiLorenzo is very convincing in his book “The Real Lincoln” because of the many quotes and questions he presents to his audience. By persuading his readers to question all their formal beliefs of Lincoln he gets them to think Lincoln might be this monster that he portrays him to be. Lincoln probably was not a saint like many have made him out to be but he was still the man who demolished slavery and held the United States together during a tough period. By making such a historical figure look like a freud many refuted him, one article by Ken Masugi tells of how DiLorenzo misused quotes and made people believe they meant something by it that they did not. Masugi states DiLorenzo “frequently distorts the meaning of the primary sources he cites, Lincoln most of all.”(Masugi) Masugi then gives examples of how Dilorenzo misused quotes in his book. DiLorenzo’s book had strengths such as its persuasiveness, but also had weaknesses like his misuse of primary sources, and not only diminishing a few of Lincoln’s accomplishments but continuing by degrading his who he was as a
DiLorenzo evidently proves to find more faults in Abraham Lincoln and his decision process while he was president. Therefore, he wrote this book for one purpose. And that was to “cure the selective amnesia Lincoln’s defenders have promoted” (Ewers). This book promptly gives evidence throughout it to prove all of DiLorenzo’s statements about Lincoln. However, DiLorenzo failed to ever mention the opposing views. Although DiLorenzo may not have complied with Lincoln that still did not take away from the kind of leader Lincoln was. No matter what was thrown his way during his presidency, “Lincoln rose above his shortcomings and tackled, head on, the most challenging issue of his day” (Gamble). Without mentioning Lincoln’s strong points as well as his weak, DiLorenzo’s book has a lower qualification as a book of research and more of
DiLorenzo, Thomas J. The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an
...he former. Also, Lincoln shows a remarkable change in character from his ambitious ante bellum days, to his later years concurrent with the civil war, which are drenched in solemnity and even a little bit of religious zeal. It is interesting to watch his growth as a politician, from what could be considered a firebrand, insensitive to the issues at hand, to the unforthcoming fresh president fearful of civil war, to the previously mentioned zealous patriarch. As one can see, his personal and political growth goes hand in hand; being very difficult to separate. Ultimately, by examining Lincoln’s major speeches, one can arrive at a variety of conclusions, being that one can trace the changes of Lincoln’s character and political personality over the years, and determine as to what extent was Lincoln a democratic autocrat; the answer to the latter conclusion being hardly.
DiLorenzo is an American economics professor at Loyola University Maryland Sellinger School of business. He is a frequent speaker at von Misses Institute events . DiLorenzo has a B.A.in economics from West Minster College in Pennsylvania. DiLorenzo was born August 8, 1954. His book, Lincoln Unmasked: What you’re not Supposed to know about Dishonest Abe, continues is expropriation be gone in the real Lincoln. He is also the author of How Capitalism saved America, Hamiltons Curse: How Jeffersons Arch Enemy Portrayed the American Revolution – And What It Means For Americans Today.
"Abraham Lincoln." American Eras. Vol. 6. Detroit: Gale, 1999. Student Resources in Context. Web. 2 Dec. 2013.
In my examination of the works, I came across a particular sculpture that portrayed both beauty and craftsmanship. A 15th century sculpture (1490), made in Venice, Italy by Tullio Lombardo, shows a life-size figure of Adam. Titled Adam, the work is the most prominent in the gallery mostly because of its 6-foot standing. It immediately caught my attention and gave me a very realistic impression. One beige color and made of marble, Adam is depicted simply, yet the statue has intense emotions. His meaningful glance is seen in the upward and tilted head position. Adam has almost lifeless looking eyes and seems to be staring into the distance. With these sagging eyes, parted lips, and lacking posture I feel Adam’s guilt is displayed in this figure.
David Herbert Donald's Lincoln is a biography of our sixteenth President, Abraham Lincoln. At the age of twenty one, he was sure he did not want to be like his father Thomas Lincoln, an uneducated farmer, so he left his fathers house permanently. He had many jobs, learned many lessons, and made both friends and enemies, all which helped him to become one of the greatest presidents of the United States of America during the time the country had split, the Civil War. Thoroughly researched and excellently written, this biography comes alive and shows us what really happened during the early to mid-nineteenth century and it still puts us in the point of view of our former president, using the information and ideas available to him.
Overall, Lincoln is a comprehensive study of Abraham Lincoln’s life and is a factual goldmine. Donald’s omission of summarizing paragraphs and lack of conclusion make understanding the larger picture hard if the reader is unfamiliar with the story of Abraham Lincoln, so this book is best-suited to researchers and history buffs. Even though Donald’s thesis was ill-supported, the value of his book did not lie with the argument, but with the sheer amount of information contained within the pages, making the thesis the lesser focus of the work.
In his work, The Real Lincoln, economic historian Thomas J. DiLorenzo tells quite the different tale. Daring to criticize this beloved president, DiLorenzo defends his antithetical statements with several key points: Lincoln was more similar to a dictator than an American President. Arguing that the War Between the States was wholly unconstitutional, DiLorenzo corrects the popular misconception that Lincoln’s war was one of abolition. War was not necessary to end slavery, but it was necessary to fulfill Lincoln’s true agenda – to destroy the most significant check on the powers of the central government: the right of secession.1
Pol Pot was a Cambodian Revolutionary who led the Khmer Rouge outbreak that led to many many deaths. Before Pot began all of this craziness he went to college on full scholarship to study radio electronics. He quickly became vastly interested in Marxism and ended up losing his scholarships. Pol Pot then returned to Cambodia and joined the underground Communist movement. (The History Place; Genocide
Dilorenzo, Thomas J.. The Real Lincoln: a new look at Abraham Lincoln, his agenda, and an unnecessary war. Roseville, Calif: Prima, 2002
...k, The Real Lincoln, was written to change one’s ideas about the man that Abraham Lincoln really was. Lincoln is very often regarded as the man who fought to end slavery and secure the rights of man. However, DiLorenzo makes strong arguments that Lincoln did not fight the war to combat slavery, and only wanted to expand the size of the federal government. DiLorenzo uses numerous sources, including comments Lincoln himself made, in order to prove his point. The Real Lincoln will forever change the image that has been established regarding Abraham Lincoln.
The book was very informational, but for modern day, it seemed to make the audience stray away from the book. My opinion on how the book depicted the process of the Abraham Lincoln’s career is very justifying and he portrayed Lincoln very well. The author would go off on tangents, talking about a specific person’s background, and explaining how and why that person got there. I understand that he wanted to provide enough background information so the reader could follow along his way of explaining the chain of events, but after a lot of digression, it tires the reader, and I personally lost interest. I struggled a lot when I had to read these specific sections. The book was an easy read, but when it deviated from the main story it was difficult to want to keep reading. I did, however, like how Thomas explained why Lincoln strived for perfection and had the elegance and determination to be something. There were moments were the highlight of his book was Lincoln’s failures and him trying to get back on top, which helps the reader relate and have something in common. It was very captivating because I would picture myself in their position and I realized that common thinkers, like me, would have never controlled the issue the way they
Surrealism and the surrealist movement is a ‘cultural’ movement that began around 1920’s, and is best known for its visual art works and writings. According to André Berton, the aim was “to resolve the previously contradictory conditions of dream and reality into an absolute reality, a super-reality” (Breton 1969:14). Surrealists incorporated “elements of surprise, unexpected juxtapositions and ‘non sequitur”. Hence, creating unnerving, illogical paintings with photographic precision, which created strange creatures or settings from everyday real objects and developed advanced painting techniques, which allowed the unconscious to be expressed by the self (Martin 1987:26; Pass 2011:30).