It took me a minute to figure out that this wasn’t an actual documentary but in fact a "mockumentary". The film reminded me much of the format of the Colbert Report, so dry that someone who doesn’t understand sarcasm might miss the point of this movie.

Some parts were very offensive and I found myself feeling some sort of secondary embarrassment for the people that were laughing in the audience. I remembered the quote that flashed in the beginning of the film. "If you’re going to tell people the truth you better make them laugh, otherwise they’ll kill you." But I still couldn’t help hypothetically putting myself in the shoes of an African American watching this movie and wondering about their reactions; if they would find the sarcasm as humorous as the Caucasian audience.

The commercials were especially harsh, especially "The Gold Dust Twins" and "Fast Track". To find out some of the commercials were actually real, and were actually advertised on television was painful. There is an artist named, Betye Saar whose work is based on racism and whose piece "The Liberation of Aunt Jemima" reminded me so much of the "Coon Chicken Inn" logo. View it here: http://www.netropolitan.org/saar/auntjemima.html .
I though of her immediately when I saw this commercial.

I fount it interesting that the movie drew parallels to communism and the holocaust and I thought the bit about "draptomania" (what causes slaves to run away) was clever. I must give the film props for taking it there. It really did make an impact on me and left me disgusted which I think is what its intent was. The movie was about more than just racism and slavery, it was about white supremacy. After all, "what is terrorism to one is patriotism to another". I hope that movies like this do create awareness to the horrors of our history and their agonizing consequences and allow us to learn from our mistakes.

The lecture by Professor Claycomb was very interesting on many accounts. One of the first things that sparked my attention was the fix for hypermediatized images after WWII. Claycomb quoted, "The map has replaced the landscape" which means images replace what we take as real and I think this is true. Even I, as a cynical, pseudo-nonconformist young adult, am guilty of it. I find myself expecting my life to turn out like what happens to characters in movies…always a happy ending. This must be why celebrities and Hollywood are such a big industry. We try to live our lives vicariously through movies and emulate celebrities.

It scares me that Claycomb mentioned identity as "constructable"…that identity is all an act. How we have one personality around our friends and another around our parents. It intrigues me that who we are is provided for us by gender, and that women used to be regarded as less developed men. It’s sad that we weren’t treated equally or given universal suffrage until the 19th amendment was ratified in 1920.

Claycomb said, "we think of freaks as ‘freaks’ and not as people suffering some kind of trauma". Which leads right into what he said about disability equaling de-masculation. This made me think of how much I struggle with perfection. Maybe this is why.

One last thought I had about this lecture was regarding the gender response. Do we do everything we do because we’re socially, culturally, and historically brought up to do it that way? Could be.

The first thing that struck me about this movie was how it took place in Ukraine. Ukraine is the place of my origin so the setting definitely appealed to me and I could identify with the movie right away, even understanding the words they spoke. The second thing that struck me however was the terrible accent that Alex had. This, for me, detracted from the film.

I didn’t especially like the movie. Its message wasn’t as poignant or moving as others we have watched in this class. I understand most of the message comes from the grandfather who was ashamed to be ashamed of being Jewish, and the story that the old woman tells changes his perspective. At the end of the trip Jonathan wasn’t afraid of dogs anymore. "Everything is illuminated in the light of the past, always on the inside looking out". I like how Jonathan sees everyone he meets during his trip at the airport, as a different person.

During the movie someone says something like "sometimes searching for a ring in the water is useless" which reminded me of the Strayed memoir we read where she says "I thought about how if you lose a ring in a river, you are never going to get it back, no matter how badly you want it or how long you wait."

I am curious to find out where this movie is filmed because the landscape is absolutely beautiful and takes away some of my fear of traveling to Ukraine.

I really enjoyed Mark Snyder's presentation of pain in art. Although I had an idea of what I wanted to do for the visual project, some of the artists that he introduced further developed my ideas. I've looked at Barbara Kruger while doing visual research for my own senior show. She is a pioneer in the ways that she incorporates text into art and the messages her work delivered. She has a strong design sense that any artist would be wise to emulate.

I loved Tracy Emin's work. I admire her use of mixed media materials and text to deliver her ideas. In my own experience I find it hard to deliver a specific message and reach the viewer's sensibilities without the use of text. A piece can stand alone but many times the viewer sees his own personal understanding in the work (which is a good thing) but text is useful in art for directing the viewer’s thinking.

David Clark was another artist that appealed to me. I've visited his work before but I've never seen any of his films. I liked what I saw of Bully and I think I would like to see the whole movie.

I find that my art is more about pain than beauty. There will always be a debate about what constitutes something as art. Art is subjective, but in my opinion I think among other criteria, art inspires some type of reaction from the viewer. Art merits some type of closer inspection. Strong art delivers a message and the viewer takes something away from the piece. In this way it is much the same as pain is. Love also. Maybe that is why these factors are catalysts as well as inspirations for creation.

I was reading about Frued the other day and somewhere it said that Frued believed 'sublimation' was the only proper defense mechanism. Sublimation is the transformation of unwanted impulses into something less harmful...a release...such as art is to those with pain/ expressing pain.

I don’t know if I like the mural by Graydon Parrish in The New Britain Museum of American Art. The technique is beautiful and the intention is clear, a commemorative depiction of the 9/11 disaster however the painting itself to me seems like an anachronism…as if it is borrowing modern inventions into classical times. I don’t have the objection that most of the people had in the class to this creation; that it was too soon and too beautiful to create and display such a piece. I think that the only objection I have to it is that it’s too direct. I prefer art with more subtlety and not direct representation and in this way it fails for me. The technique is breathtaking but the fact that the painting is done in an academic style yet features 21st century inventions ruins it for me. When I think of a great painting born out of tragedy Picasso’s Guernica immediately comes to mind. We see chaos, pain, and suffering in Guernica in which The Cycle of Terror and Tragedy: September 11, 2001, I think just doesn’t deliver.

Maybe I have a different opinion on these works because I am an artist and I guess I’ve been trained to not only look at images at face value but be able to appreciate and evaluate them in terms of light, form, color, composition etc. therefore separating me from other viewers. Maybe for this reason the picture of the falling man does not appall me. It also does not make sense to me for it to be censored. I’ve seen many deeply disturbing photographs. Many photographers aspire to get the shot of a deeply disturbing subject for reasons of social change or even success. For whatever reason I feel that a great piece of art can not be censored. Art is ultimately freedom of expression and in terms of composition, line, form, light, this is an extraordinary photograph. In my opinion this amazing photograph is a testament to this man’s life and the horror of the event. However I can agree with Susan Sontag in her book On Photography "concerned photography has done at least as much to deaden conscience as to arouse it", at least in the case of this picture.

I can agree that the movie “Harold and Maude” is a romance, and also an inspiration.
Maude said “Here today, gone tomorrow, don’t get too attached to anything” and in that way I think it is similar to what the message of Celestina tried to deliver. Unrequited affection, and not having any control over desire, are big contributors to the tragedy of love and unhappiness in life. Maude knows this. She has lived through adversity (survivor of a concentration camp) and heartache (loss of her husband) and she has learned not to take anything in life too seriously and just to enjoy every minute. This is why the movie is so inspirational.

Harold, hasn’t learned this valuable message yet. At first he doesn’t have any desire for living. He tempts death and doesn’t care to live or explore the world’s beauty. Then he meets Maude, a unique old woman who introduces him to the spice of life. He learns control over his desire only when Maude kills herself on her 80th birthday. Harold falls in love with Maude because she shows him the pleasure of life and in that way, even after she dies, her lessons will live on. To me, this is why the movie is also considered a romance.

The age difference in the movie creeped me out a little, but less so when I consider Maude as just a muse for teaching Harold some valuable life lessons. In a way it also reminds me of Eternal Sunshine, in the way that an unlikely pair find each other and enlighten each other in love. I loved the soundtrack too. Cat Stevens is still one of my favorites, even though he is a “terrorist”.

The story of Celestina is really quite universal. It’s a story of unrequited love, lack of control over desire, putting a lover on a pedestal, and infatuation with the fantasy of a person that does not exist. These are all consequences I’m all too familiar with. Celestina is a story that is so relatable because we’ve all experienced these drawbacks during our love endeavors.

It’s really quite a depressing message that Celestina sends. Part of human nature is never being satisfied with what we have in front of us. We’re always requiring more and more and more. It’s like a sickness. Our happiness is fleeting. It’s like humans are obsessed with consumerism whether it be for material goods, fun, partners, love…the general pursuit of what we think will bring us "happiness". Yet it’s never enough. We always desire more. And while this can be a good thing because it can motivate us to strive towards perfection, it an also devour us and make us very unhappy and ungrateful. I can’t help to think of a quote by the Buddha that I feel relates to this message. "The source of all unhappiness comes from not being able to let go"… and it’s true! We pour our energy into things that bring us so much unhappiness and stress when not retained or achieved. Being able to let go would free our minds and spirits and make us free of desires and ultimately happy. However this is not an easy accomplishment and maybe only the Buddha can master it.

This was the only topic of conversation in our class that is about "pain" regarding "love". Two seemingly opposites that can be totally connected. The lecture inspired two questions that I don’t know if anyone can ever answer. One is, if desire can never be fulfilled are we searching for, or have an affinity for, the ones who we know can never fulfill our desire or the image we create of them? The second, why do we create such impossible imagery of love? Love is so painful because it can’t be controlled. That’s all I know.

I’m reluctant to say that I "really enjoyed" the lecture about rape because of how that could sound but I did find it very interesting. The presentation was resolved and unbiased, touching on many angles of the tragedy. I must admit I had no idea what direction this lecture would go in. I know it was based on the topic of rape jokes but I didn’t think there was really such a thing. At least I thought I had never heard any. I can’t believe how mistaken I was. I guess I never considered prison rape an actual rape joke and was thinking more along the lines of "Two blondes were raped….". There is an alarming amount of prison rape humor and it’s so common that alarmingly I never even noticed it or noted it as appalling. Like you said in the lecture, Professor, we make these jokes to separate ourselves from the victim but in this case I felt I was so separated from the subject of prison rape humor that it didn’t even phase me. I was so desentsized from this type of humor that it didn’t even catch my attention. Unfortunately if we keep the cycle of joking about rape and de-sensitizing the topic further we continue to demean it and keep it in light.

It’s a very serious discussion however. One thing I would have liked to bring up in the Q&A was how quickly and rampantly HIV is spread through prison rape. I learned about this last year when I was taking AIDS and epidemics. Even though the government knows that men are raped and HIV is spread in jails they turn a blind eye to this. They won’t endorse condom use in prison because they won’t accept that this is happening. They continue to look the other way while HIV spreads throughout the population. Many of these HIV positive prisoners are one day set free and then perpetuate the spread into society.

I had forgotten this but remembered it during the last few minutes of the presentation. When talking about how one of her roommates dressed during spring fling, I remember my friend saying she was walking around "just asking to get raped". It came to my attention that this is a stupid and ignorant thing to say. No one walks around "asking to get raped" whether they are dressed sleazy or not. The whole catch of rape is that it is inconsentual and how could one literally "ask for it". I wish the stigmata behind rape could be lifted. I think if we stopped using it as the topic of cheap jokes and focused more on discussion of it as a serious offense whether in prison or not, we could prevent a lot of people from becoming victims of it.

Requiem for a Dream is a poignant and painful experience. It’s like a car wreck that is so bad you want to look away but you can’t. What is perhaps the most sad and realistic part about this story, differentiating it from other movies, is that it exploits the selfishness of human nature. While every character in this narrative is intertwined, they all live in their own individual microcosm much more concerned about themselves than the people they love. They naïvely think that they are taking steps, with the involvement of drugs, that will allow them to ‘get ahead’. They foolishly think that they have power over drugs and will gain an advantage.

When they enter the drug trade Harry, Marion, and Tyrone are on top of the world. But after bailing Tyrone out of prison the group faces financial hardship and each character comes to terms with their value. Harry convinces Marion to prostitute herself for drug money. Harry and Tyrone leave Marion to venture to Florida to score drugs. Harry’s arm becomes infected and eventually amputated from his irresponsible heroin addiction. And all Harry’s mother cares about is fitting back into her red dress despite advice from her son.

Had these people not gotten involved in drugs they might not have been so blindsided to the harm they were subjecting themselves and others to. Like the adage goes “The road to hell is paved with good intentions” and while Sara, Harry, Marion, and Tyrone were all just trying to make their dreams come true they shouldn’t have expected to make an honest living out of a dirty habit.

I love the visual style of the movie. The close-ups of the dilated pupils, syringes, and drugs in bloodstream were both simultaneously enticing and repellent. So many details of this film were stomach-turning; Harry’s infected arm, Sara’s teeth grinding, Big Tim’s teeth, Marion’s sexcapades all contributed to making the viewer uneasy about the message and meaning of this film. I love this movie I just wish it didn’t have to be true. It reminds me of the rollercoaster ride we read about in Beautiful Boy.