His Opinions Upon Art by W.B. Yeats & Radiolab's Who Am I?

[Prof. Madad]

Read His Opinions Upon Art by W.B. Yeats and listen to the Radiolab episode Who Am I? (particular emphasis on the portions with Dr. V.S. Ramachandran)
Share thoughts on reflection from both text and audio program, in relation to working on your Personal Mythology, ie. self and symbolic self.

[michael]

You are always Plural.

On Sep 26, 8:20 pm, "Prof. Madad" <ama...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Read His Opinions Upon Art by W.B. Yeats and listen to the Radiolab episode Who

> Am I? <http://www.radiolab.org/2007/may/07/> (particular emphasis on the

> portions with Dr. V.S. Ramachandran)
> Share thoughts on reflection from both text and audio program, in relation
> to working on your Personal Mythology, ie. self and symbolic self.
>

>  yeats_blake.pdf
> 1681KViewDownload

[NoraG]

#1 Who Am I?
      I was most interested in Steven Johnson's experience looking in a mirror at 7 years old and freaking out about the meaning of his life and who he is. I specifically remember looking at myself like that many times, more often in my teens when I started sitting on my rug in front of my door mirror and do my hair and makeup every morning. I have a sort of fixation on the fact that I don't really know how people view me, or how I even physically looked to others. It makes you forget who you are, just like when you repeat a word, and start to seriously focus your brain back upon itself.
    I like how the mirror is a repeated theme within all the hypothetical situations.

      I remember in class someone mentioned the story about the woman whose "head exploded" when she essentially lost her identity. I sometimes refer to my own experiences as "you know, when my brain exploded" or, if I'm talking too fast I point to my brain, bulge my eyes out, tilt my head and make a weird noise. But the story is really sad...a blown up version of my "events" as they call them. The other stories were really compelling, but this is a really emotional story. Its funny that she herself feels different, even better. She knows what happened, but doesn't seem to care. Its a detachment that I think is a defense mechanism, which I also experienced. Even when it happened I was completely oblivious, but the differences are sometimes very apparent to me.  Its like discovering a completely different character, and accepting it, and learning to be its friend.

   I do think the idea that your self is a narrative of your life, but I don't think it could be that simply summed up.  The reactions of the chimps reminds me of Child Development when we learned about the theories of how we learn from a combination of trial and error, reward/punishment and the hidden mechanisms of the brain, and when these qualities appear in children. We also learned how; because they found that in some African tribes that they tested had a different way of thinking. In our society we have reached Abstract Thought, where we can create the outlandish purple bird without ever seeing one. The researchers asked them a math question something like:
     "You have 6 black cows and 4 red cows, and you lose 1 black cow and 3 red cows, how many black cows do you have left?"
And the villagers didn't answer the way we would...they were primarily concerned over the loss of the cows, they only knew how many they lost, but didn't care how many red or black cows there were. They didn't need to think that way, because its isn't necessary to their survival. We made this distinction, but agreed that they is one extra step in thought that some cultures don't need.

Also, its fascinating that the author of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde came from his little men.

#2 W.B. Yeats
    This was a rather intense reading, I had to read things over if the message flew by me, or sometimes I would skim it only to feel lost anyways. But I think I had the general gist, despite its difference in language to the one I'm used to now. Yeats paraphrases William Blake in his attempt to explain inspiration, as well as the objective of art. Not only that, but the objective of his art at one time in his life and then in a very different other. Blake struggled with his inspiration, and with the idea of art being able to communicate memories, feelings, and stories to another person and still maintain a balance of realism in form.  Blake once believed, before his famous illustrations, that the intent of the artist, in order to be successful in painting, has to be in line with perfect realism, as if to capture it completely and accurately.
   As I'm trying to understand it, he struggled for so long, thinking so hard about the masters and their perfection of their craft, and he had his first revelation and inspiration for extreme attention to detail that would flow out of him. Here, instead of the vision leading the execution, the execution became the most important element.  He was so literal an artist that he believed that everything in life had a bounding line, like we'd call coloring inside the lines. But eventually his artistic vision came to the forefront, and his moment of triumph was when he chose to focus on the feelings of a piece, and then let execution follow. His most famous works of art came out of this revelation.
    During the writing of my response, I saw a lot of similarities to what we talked about in class.  Like how hard it is to communicate basic feelings about certain images, memories and situations, and whether its better (or easier) to be completely blunt and spell it out literally to a viewer, or to focus on those feelings in order to sum up a scene and not overdecorate it.  We're moving towards the latter, in which we sum up a lifetime of narrative into a picture so that its not "what you see is what you get" but more like "feel what I feel".  We are minimalizing and combining and paraphrasing our memorable moments and thoughts and feelings further and further to find the real thread of the story, the true driving force in an image.

[David Saunders]

Yeats: This excerpt has a few concepts that resonated with me. Firstly, I believe William Blake is an excellent historical figure to reference in our current society. Like Blake's Arts and Crafts movement was a response to the monotony of the Industrial Revolution, I believe we too are undergoing a social transformation, i.e. a return to ideas, beliefs, artistic styles that emphasize the individual's place in society rather than the reverse. I digress. Yeat's three primary commands: "to seek a determinate outline, to avoid a generalized treatment, and to desire always abundance and exuberance" (Yeats, 123), were of particular interest to me. While he goes on to say that Palmer, who's writings Yeat's paraphrases, did not stringently adhere to these commands; their importance is undeniable. Great thinking and the resulting actions arguably all adhered to these commands. However, I tend to disagree when it comes to the "great and golden rule of art...that the more distinct, sharp and wiry the bounding line, the more perfect the work of art; and the less keen and sharp, the greater is the evidence of weak imitation, plagiarism and bungling" (120). While he refers to the "line" that divides and object from it's surrounding space, it still seems like a vague afterthought. Perhaps I'm too harsh a critic. However, I don't think that this "rule" applies, as stringently as Yeats does, to our current society. I would argue that the updated idiom would be "think outside the box", however, that inherently implies that you know the box. More so than just art, how can one know where the box is in their every day lives? It would appear that the "wiry bounding line" is no longer applicable when reality itself is constantly in motion. From all of this, my take away is this: Creation, of anything worth merit, is a process of numerous steps, foremost requiring the creator to observe and analyze an object/person/drawing/etc. in regards to it's surrounding space.(In my opinion, it is this step which is the most important and by far the most difficult, because we are a product of our environmental influences). From there it's an arduous process with a final goal of creating something new. 

It's difficult to discern with any certainty whether an object would be considered a perfect work of art, however, As long as art is continually created. The overarching trends within all art can be considered as perfect.

Regarding Radio Lab's "Who Am I": 

The science behind the brain's relationship to identity and personality is fascinating: partially due to it's shroud of mystery and also to it's relationship to social dynamics. The brain's ability to discern social concerns from individual desires is one of the greatest human innovations. When we break it down to it's basic form, we are as Dr. V.S. Ramachandran says: "neurons whizzing about". I guess this could be shocking. However, everything is constantly in motion. the atoms that make up molecules, which make up the chemical compounds, which make up my cells, which make up my fingers as i type this are all constantly in a state of motion. Everything is constantly moving, changing, adapting; victims to one of the most elementary rules of physics: every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Who am I? There are innumerable correct answers. I am a son, I am a brother, I am a mass of cells, I am a organism, I am a collection of finely tuned elements from the periodic table, I am a student. Your def. of who you are, is entirely dependent upon the context your referring to. When it comes to human's vs. other animals, we have the ability to create a narrative for an object. We have the ability to connect everything by separating an object from it's surroundings and creating a mental image of that object. Essentially, we can think abstractly. I think, therefore I am. I am, because I choose to be.

[michael]

W.B. Yeats discusses the work and principals of William Blake
carefully, and poetically. There are a few misses in my mind but MANY
important messages within this excerpt for us all to internalize.

To contrast and compare seeing and imagining, the ephemera of nature
vs the immortality of the imagined world. The relationship between the
two universes is of crucial importance. An allegorist has to fully
comprehend and ACUTELY observe the tangible and the intangible in
order to symbolize. To Design, more specifically to symbolize
effectively, ya gotta keep all three eyes opened. While much
importants sits on the imagined, technique and form must not go
unconsidered or unpracticed. And of course, let us never forget the
"why"!

Who am I? That I can comprehend I is the first bit of perplexing
awesomeness. To return to my last entry, you are always plural. From
Dr. V.S. Ramachandran's explanation of the firing of billions of
microscopic synapses giving life to the human brain, to Dr. Robert
Sapolsky candid description of life after his fathers passing, the
radiolab segment highlights the fact that in no world, natural or
imagined, are we ever any one singular thing. We are of (blessed with)
infinite complexity, that to whatever order, we owe it to ourselves to
accept and revel in.

On Sep 26, 8:20 pm, "Prof. Madad" <ama...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Read His Opinions Upon Art by W.B. Yeats and listen to the Radiolab episode Who

> Am I? <http://www.radiolab.org/2007/may/07/> (particular emphasis on the

> portions with Dr. V.S. Ramachandran)
> Share thoughts on reflection from both text and audio program, in relation
> to working on your Personal Mythology, ie. self and symbolic self.
>

>  yeats_blake.pdf
> 1681KViewDownload

[Jessie Oh]

Blake’s visual translation of his imagination reminds me of
iconoclasts virtues: conventional symbolism and a ‘literal realist of
imagination’. It’s true any characteristic can obscure the path of
communication between creator and viewer, but to run to the conclusion
of intention is simplifying design to a mathematical equation. Work
will take its shape and be stripped of emotion as generalization piles
on; It is only a matter of time that a recognizable visual becomes a
symbol. The context in which the work exists becomes more important
than the point of its origin as we can see in The Ancient of Days. A
painting so easily dismissible to a trained modern eye, especially
with its familiar and idiosyncratic symbolism, is regarded as a
representation of man’s enlightenment. I agree with Yeats that
“[Blake’s] imagination is perfect and complete” and “his technique has
a like perfection, a like completeness”. The process of imagination to
technique is described as a burden to the creator and that is because
the stroke of a brush can ultimately ruin the direct path to the
absolute moment of intent. The ‘Aleph’ as we recall.

On Sep 26, 8:20 pm, "Prof. Madad" <ama...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Read His Opinions Upon Art by W.B. Yeats and listen to the Radiolab episode Who

> Am I? <http://www.radiolab.org/2007/may/07/> (particular emphasis on the

> portions with Dr. V.S. Ramachandran)
> Share thoughts on reflection from both text and audio program, in relation
> to working on your Personal Mythology, ie. self and symbolic self.
>

>  yeats_blake.pdf
> 1681KViewDownload

[Chris Kelsch]

How fragile is the mind? A simple accident can change the way ones
life is in an instance. When that change is made does the soul get
severed as well? Is there such things as souls. What is personality?
How have we developed out consciousness and what is it? Does it exist
in the tangible world? Radiolab's episode has these questions
pulsating through my own mind which then has me picturing the metaphor
of trying to identify oneself in a mirror as an adolescent. Is our
personality and consciousness a set of tangible images? How are these
images rendered? This makes me think back to the reading about the
bubbles in the beer. Is there a set process that all of our brains
work? How are we able to abstract thoughts? Do we abstract through
training our own minds, does this mean that our brains are always
evolving and expanding? I could continue to ask thousands of questions
about the brain, imagination, and the soul, but no matter how far
technology goes, I do not feel that these questions are answerable by
any one answer.

On Sep 26, 8:20 pm, "Prof. Madad" <ama...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Read His Opinions Upon Art by W.B. Yeats and listen to the Radiolab episode Who

> Am I? <http://www.radiolab.org/2007/may/07/> (particular emphasis on the

> portions with Dr. V.S. Ramachandran)
> Share thoughts on reflection from both text and audio program, in relation
> to working on your Personal Mythology, ie. self and symbolic self.
>

>  yeats_blake.pdf
> 1681KViewDownload

[anne chiang]

I found the radio lab audio quite interesting. I found that the Chimp
having self awareness was interesting because they're just like us
humans, but they're dna is just a percentage off from ours and just
that little difference separates us into different species. "We are
all a car crash or a slip away from being a different person." When I
heard this quote, I connected this with the movie Alice in Wonderland
(the Tim Burton version) because as Alice fell into the rabbit hole,
she was a different person in a different world. She was trying to
figure out her role and who she was throughout the movie. "I can't
help you if you don't even know who you are, stupid girl." -
Caterpillar.

[Jessica Mazur]

I really enjoyed listening to this audio and the discussion on self
awareness. I mostly related to the story about the daughter discussing
her mothers illness, i always reflect on how fragile life is
(especially when i work out) i think its because i had a relative have
a heart attack and die while on the treadmill. This story in
particular made me think about how a traumatic event can shape you,
the rest of your life, and the lives of those around you. I
appreciated when the daughter said that after what her and her mother
went through little things like traffic and complaining about the day
is not important. I try to live my life appreciating every day given
to me because i understand how fragile life is

[Jacob Berlow]

Yeats:

Main take-away: It is valuable to work toward an elevation of representation that reaches a deeper and more honest level of meaning than conventional pictorialism is able to achieve. 

Response: This message provides helpful inspiration for someone who is trying to communicate serious personal material through visual media. We all keep looking at the stuff we put up and coming to the conclusion that it's hard to get across the basic messages that we mean to get across. This passage offers a push towards a next step of trying to really impart something to the viewer that could not be communicated in any other way (namely through language). 

Ramachandran:

Main take-away:

The commonly held "sense of self" may be nothing more than subjective imagination of a personal narrative.

Response:

This is pretty close to how I have felt about personal identity for a long time. It's a fantastic angle to consider when working on a project involving personal mythology. One the one hand it's scary and uncomfortable to think of to some extent "making up" what is essentially the story of our lives. If you take it as a unavoidable fact though, maybe it can be very liberating: we are the historians of our own life stories — why not make them sensational?

On Sep 26, 2011, at 8:20 PM, "Prof. Madad" <ama...@gmail.com> wrote:

Read His Opinions Upon Art by W.B. Yeats and listen to the Radiolab episode Who Am I? (particular emphasis on the portions with Dr. V.S. Ramachandran)
Share thoughts on reflection from both text and audio program, in relation to working on your Personal Mythology, ie. self and symbolic self.

<yeats_blake.pdf>