Monday, April 20, 2009
The Monument to the Murdered Jews of Europe
All 3 articles discuss the Berlin Monument, but give completely different points of view on the subject. Press cool on Berlin memorial, a piece done by the BBC, gives an inside look as to how German newspapers perceive the new monument. Comments range from approval to disapproval of the point conveyed by the slabs, and whether there should be a memorial at all because it plays on German guilty, even 60 years after the Holocaust. These, I believe are very valid points. Although it is never too late to commemorate such atrocious acts, the design was chosen for a reason. The abstract and simple shape of the memorial is mean to be interpreted by the viewer, which I believe is a brilliant design. Blatantly pointing out what is being commemorated has been done many times before, and a new generation of Germans should feel moved to never again do such an act again, not feel ashamed for what a past generation has done.
Michelangelo's David
In September of 2008 a BBC writer by the name of Mark Duff wrote an article about how Michelangelo's David, could collapse. Experts are saying that because The David is exposed to people walking past it each day, and creating vibrations the statue has become endangered. In addition to the vibrations, the marble in which the statue is made from as well as it's shape serves as threat to the statue as well. An idea of encasing the statue has been proposed, however this would cost about one million euros. Four years ago the cracks on the statue were repaired. This was extremely controversial because experts felt that they were changing the statue from it's original state. The David has been an iconic statue for 504 years (since the Renaissance), an originally served as a symbol for Florence's Republican ideals. Today it symbolizes many different ideals, and depending on whom you ask you find different answers.
Other sites on The David:
AIDS Quilt
In this article from the January 31st 2007 issue of the New York Times, the dispute between Cleve Jones, creator of the quilt, and its caretaker, the Names Project Foundation is covered. It is argued that the battle goes beyond custody of the quilt, but instead reflects the changing purpose and symbolism of the AIDS quilt as the AIDS epidemic changes. Initially, the quilt was intended to raise awareness to the AIDS crisis. However, the current purpose and effectiveness of the quilt is questioned. It is argued that the impact of the quilt has diminished because it is now so big that it is rarely seen in its entirety. Also, the quilt is very expensive and has lead the National AIDS Fund to debt. Though it is undisputed that the quilt has been a significant milestone relative to the AIDS epidemic, it is also evident that the quilt may have lost its "punch" over time.
This 1987 article from the New York Times was written when the idea of the quilt was still blossoming and the quilt was getting started. Thus, it was detailing the sentiment and symbolism of the quilt. However, it clearly doesn't anticipate any of the conflict that will arise about the quilt in future years. Therefore, it idealizes the meaning and effectiveness of the quilt while characterizing its intention.
The Boston Globe compared the emotional response to the quilt with that of the Vietnam Memorial. However, it is important to remember that the quilt doesn't represent the enormity of the AIDS epidemic because it can't and doesn't feature every casualty. However, the Vietnam Memorial does, for it lists the name of every victim. Therefore, if the two are compared, people may think that AIDS is a smaller scale problem than it truly is.
Camp Norway
There is not much to say (after trying three different opening sentences) about adding articles for others to explore about the monument Camp Norway (opened in May 1994) except that there is not a whole lot of opinion about it out there on the web (so far I will probably keep looking and find a whole bunch of stuff). There are only two explanations of why I would think that there wouldn't be a lot about it. One, there is only so much to say about it and maybe monuments in general, and two, a smaller Northerly country like Norway probably doesn't get that much attention on a National scale (I myself am a huge Norway supporter). Even so, I was able to find one good websites with the secondary article and the second news article still in the works.
(added post with a clip from a newspaper) http://www.ns1763.ca/lunenco/norwaycmp.html
Some other sites
Frantz Fanon
Frantz Fanon was a very well educated man that openly protested and fought against colonization. Frantz Fanon had the interesting tactic that violence against the oppressor was the ideal way to unify the colonized people. He used this unification to fight for independence against the colonizers. In this article we are able to see one of the speeches he gave and we clearly see that he is addressing the people to listen to him, to take action against and stop letting themselves be controlled. He is able to use very sophisticated rhetoric to convince his audience. I found it very interesting to see how he phrases things to make himself more credible. No just how he said it, but what he said as well was planned out very scholarly. All of his supporting evidence was true and clear stated. The language style he spoke in was very sophisticated and made the audience view him as the leader they needed.
Even though I do not believe that violence is the necessary method that needed to be used to unify the people to defend themselves against colonizers, I think Frantz did an extremely good job using rhetoric to convince the people that it was.
Even though I do not believe that violence is the necessary method that needed to be used to unify the people to defend themselves against colonizers, I think Frantz did an extremely good job using rhetoric to convince the people that it was.
An Unknown Shakespeare---D'Souza
In part 7 of this riveting debate between Hitchens and D'Souza at the Freedom Fest in 2008, D'Souza ends with a flurry of remarks that boil down to say: unless there was some illiterate that created a character more riveting than Hamlet then there must have been a Jesus, because there has only been one Shakespeare and I could actually have to agree with him on this one considering that there is conjecture that one man(Shakespeare) could have created so many masterpieces. I think that D'Souza is brilliant and is one of the best debaters tat I have ever, the way that he takes all of Hitchens' points and succinctly attacks them all is egregious. I truly believe that even though I am not Catholic, that he brought up questions and doubts in my mind about what Hitchens said. I was in awe at how brilliant he was, and I liked the use of the Ottomans and the Mugals...
"The Unmitigated Gall of Dinesh D'Souza"
I read an article by San Diego Reader journalist, Thomas Larson, and was quite surprised about the topic. Mr. Larson wrote a 12,000 word article profiling Dinesh D'Souza; it discussed his views, his two major books Illiberal Education and The End of Racism, and how he made his money/his family life. A week after it had been published, Larson's article appeared on Dinesh's personal website, only not in its complete form. Dinesh cut it down, removing paragraphs in which his personal life was discussed and criticisms of his arguments namely criticism of his argument that "Democrats, because they supported gay rights, are now the party of "bestiality" and sexual deviance." Mr. Larson wasn't notified of these changes, and this sparked off a big controvery. I find it interesting that Mr. D'Souza has the audacity to do such a rude and illegal act. It's even more interesting that Mr. D'Souza, who is a hardcore Republican committed to the principles of private property, would do such a thing, and then carelessly shrug it off like he did nothing wrong. The article can be found here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)