"Another Ten Years Go By" --Queen Parody

Tom walks warily down the street,
With the brim pulled way down low.
Aint no sound but the sound of his pod,
Lap tops ready to go.
Are you ready, are you ready for this?
Are you ready for the robots, yet?

Out of the sky line the robots come,
Taking over the world. YEAHHH.

Another 10 years go by, Another 10 years,
And another 10 years, and another 10 years, another 10 years go by!
“HEY! I’M GUNNA GET YOU TOO!”
Another 10 years go by.

How do you think I’m gunna learn to live,
without my brain turned on?
You took me for everything that I had,
And hooked me up like a phone!

Are you happy? Are you satisfied?
The world is pretty much a machine.
Out of the sky line the robots come,
Taking over the streets.

Another 10 years go by, Another 10 years go by,
And the humans are gone, yeah the humans are gone,
Cause another 10 years went by.
“HEY! I’M GUNNA GET YOU, TOO!”
Another 10 years go by.

There are plenty of ways
you can save the world,
like walk instead of drive.
You can hike it
You can bike it
You can go outside and make them robots mad.
There is still time, yes it’s not too late
We’re waiting on the world to change

Out of the skyline the robots see
The humans aren’t gunna retreat.

The humans are back again! And the humans are back and the humans are back, the humans are back again!

In 2012 it is being said by scientists that without major change in the next 3 years the climate will have reached a point where it will be "too late." 

Barely half the US public thinks carbon pollution could warm Earth. That’s 20 percent less than in 2007, and lower than at any point in the last 12 years. In a Pew Research Center poll, Americans ranked climate dead last out of 20 top issues, behind immigration and trade policy.

Rational Change

Becoming far more than light dinner table conversation, the topic of global climate change is seen commonly in our everyday lives. Our culture over the past decade or so has been barraged with information concerning climate change. Some have chosen to accept this information that our planet is getting warmer due to our behavior, while others have chosen to deny this information as being fact. People have speculated reasons as to why so many people cannot believe this scientific information as being accurate. In the Wired article Kari Norgaard states that "Climate change is disturbing, It's something we don't want to think about. So what we do in our everyday lives is create a world where it's not there, and keep it distant." Norgaard informs us that certain companies even back the denial of climate effects and changes, one of those companies heading that is Exxon Mobile.  Going on he states that since we do not see the effects of climate changes in our everyday lives it then becomes less serious of an issue, despite the fact that all over the world that effects are being clearly seen. Greenhouse gasses were rising rapidly as a result of our burning of fossil fuels. It is being proclaimed now, by Rajendra Pachauri, the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) chairmen, that without change by 2012 that there is no turning back.

So since it can be so widely accepted as a truth and confirmed by scientists, why do a growing number of americans have such a difficulty believing it? Norgaard again states that "Our response to disturbing information is very complex. We negotiate it. We don't just take it in and respond in a rational way." Qualifying the facts on climate change as "disturbing information" seems a very accurate definition and it seems strange to think that which determines so much about our future is just being dismissed by people its level of disturbance. The journalist from Wired summed the interview up nicely at the end by saying "So we don’t want to believe climate change is happening, feel guilty that it is, and don’t know what to do about it? So we pretend it’s not a problem?" And it was these questions that boiled the content of Norgaard's interview. 

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/12/climate-psychology/

http://climatedenial.org/

Kris Kuksi

Kris Kuksi is one of the most interesting artists i have ever come across in my life. Kris spent his youth in rural seclusion and isolation along with a blue-collar, working mother, two much-older brothers and an absent father. Open country, sparse trees, and alcoholic stepfather, perhaps paved the way for an individual saturated in imagination and introversion. The grotesque to him, as it seemed, was beautiful.

Reaching adulthood, his art blossomed and created a breakthrough of personal freedom from the negative environment experienced during his youth. He soon discovered his distaste for the typical American life and pop culture, feeling that he has always belonged to the ‘Old World’. Yet, Kris’ work is about a new wilderness, refined and elevated, visualized as a cultivation emerging from the corrupt and demoralized fall of modern-day society. A place where new beginnings, new wars, new philosophies, and new endings exist. In personal reflection, he feels that in the world today much of mankind is oftentimes frivolous and fragile, being driven primarily by greed and materialism. He hopes that his art exposes the fallacies of Man, unveiling a new level of awareness to the viewer.

The complexity of Kris' art usually comes into question during interviews or gallery inquiries. When asked about his art, Kris' responds:

"The overall layout is always planned ahead of time, but the small intricate things are improvised as I go. The ideas mostly are there before I begin but sometimes the subject comes together after a lot of work has already taken place. In the sculptures, there are certain rules. There has to be an axis in which all things follow, meaning if there are organic items (the objects representative of living things), they follow their own free form axis. Meaning they can be titled or reclining. But any structural effects such as building or trusses must be parallel and level. A good example of this is "The Decision", the figure follows it's own free form, reclining in a half circular fashion. But the objects seen in the torso area are all upright and level. Any smaller organic figures are also free of this axis."

His works definitely share his thoughts on psychological issues, religious ideology, and aesthetics. He never strays from the honesty within himself though he has had to shed many masks in order to do so. He finds the materialistic world of popular culture as the food for self-indulgence, self-escapism, and shallow-heartedness. Kuksi is a true artist, obsessed with exposing the illusions we created as a result of fear in our minds and greed in our hearts and eyes. Looking deep into his art, we can find lessons structured to guide our culture back to individualism and sanity... the irony of Kris Kuksi. I find the works of Kris Kuksi to be both mimetic and emotionalist art.

I also found an interesting quote on Darkroastedblend.com tying Kuksi to Philip K. Dick.

"Art of Kris Kuksi falls in that category: wildly unpredictable and rich creations, ominous in their very amount of detail, often 'unspeakable' in a very Lovecraft-ian way, pregnant with the idea that perhaps the world is more twisted than most artists care to admit. Something that Philip K. Dick might have conjured in his worst moments of battling the 'demons of the mind', or Medieval Architects would aspire to, if they were given more creative freedom." -Dark Roasted Blend.com

My question to you

Does this art bother you? Or does it touch you on a different level of emotion?


Works Cited
"The Art of the Grotesque." Dark Roasted Blend. Web. 09 Dec. 2009. .
"Kris Kuksi - Sculpture, Drawings, Paintings -." BeinArt Surreal Art Collective. Web. 09 Dec. 2009. .
"Kris Kuksi : Sculpture." Kris Kuksi : Home. Web. 09 Dec. 2009. .

Kinetic Sculptures

For my art blog I wanted to discuss a contemporary work of art that I thought was particularly significant to our discussions in class. One of the major themes we have considered is what constitutes specifics forms/objects as art. Throughout our classes my the opinion was that everything contains characteristics that can be expressed through art. More specifically I believe that art comes in almost every form imaginable, even functional ones, and is not defined by an objects purpose but the aesthetic value expressed from it. One example I previously used was cars, they serve the purpose as a mode of transportation but are also built with artistic intentions to appeal to individuals. It is a functional object that contains unique artistic traits. Using a website called "Stumbleupon.com" I searched the internet for art that would best portray the relationship between functionality and artistic expression. What I I found was Theo Jansen and his kinetic sculptures.

"Stumble Upon" is a website that prompts a toolbar on your internet browser which redirects your webpage to other websites based on what you have selected as your points of interest. I chose art as my point of interest and began stumbling through websites eventually landing on a youtube video of a man in a BMW commercial. This mans name is Theo Jansen, an Artist and Kinetic Sculpture who builds functional forms of art. Theo Jansen was born on March 14th, 1948 in Hague, Netherlands and is a Dutch artist that uses engineering to create skeletons of animals which he lets loose on the beaches of the Netherlands. These sculptures are large spindly creatures that fuse art and science into inanimate forms of life. Theo's works are "wind-powered automatons that exhibit an incredibly lifelike dexterity" which use pipping, wood, and wing like sails to provide kinetic energy bringing his creatures to life (Inhabitat.com).

As Theo Jansen states "The walls between art and engineering exist only in our minds" (Wikipedia.com). Since 1990 Theo has reminded us of this time and time again creating ever inventive forms of artificial life that roam the beaches of the Netherlands. Following the same principals of evolution, each generation of Theo's creatures, called Strandbeests, is subject to the same forces of selection with successful forms moving forwards to create newer improved designs. Theo's menagerie of creatures walk without assistance on beaches, powered by the wind which is captured by gossamer wings that flap pumping air into bottles which create the kinetic energy used to bring the forms to life. Growing ever more creative Theo is developing new Strandbeests that use "primitive logic gates" to sense dangerous situations such as water or loose sand. Using feelers to change direction Theo's beasts are even learning to "hammer themselves into the sand on sensing approaching storms" (Wired, par. 1).

Originally a scientist Jansens roots lie in computer programming where he created a program 17 years ago. This program contains four-legged creatures that race against each other to identify survivors fit enough to reproduce. Wanting to express this idea in its physical form Theo found his own "alternative to the biological cell" in the form of plastic tubes (Wired, par. 2). Noting that animals contain the same mechanics as machines Jansen began to produce artificial life using plastics that he compares to proteins, a material that is flexible and multifunctional in the biological viewpoint of organisms. Despite starting from a computer program Jansen uses cable ties, nylon strings and adhesive tape to make functional free-forms of art that mainly follow evolution by progressing through trial and error. His creatures have even reached the point to where they can move in the absence of wind, storing compressed air in bottles using it later to keep moving. Theo's ultimate goal is to create a herd of these autonomist creatures mimicking life in its simplest form, the transfer of energy.

I chose this article because I thought that it best describe how science and art can be applied to something that is functional yet artistically appealing. I also thought that this article was interesting because of how Jansen imitates life and the basic laws of nature. I feel like it would be a very novel experience to watch one of these creatures walk by and essentially survive in it's environment. With adapted appendages this art speaks the same language that biological forms do yet the are completely inanimate. Sometimes it's important to view different topics from various perspective to fully realize what your focusing on.

Works Cited

Chino, Mike. "Strandbeest: Theo Jansen's Kinetic Sculptures." Inhabitat: Design Will Save The World. Inhabitat, 9 Aug. 2009. Web. 6 Dec. 2009. .

Jansen, Theo. "Strandbeest." Strandbeest. Theo Jansen. Web. 6 Dec. 2009. .

Sandhana, Lakshmi. "Wild Things Are On The Beach." Wired.com. Wired, 24 Jan. 2005. Web. 6 Dec. 2009. .

"Theo Jansen." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Ed. Public. Wikipedia. Web. 6 Dec. 2009. .

New Species of Birds

It is very common to have a bird feeder in your backyard because a lot of people enjoy watching birds up close right from a window, but recently it has been found that this simple act is actually starting to split a certain species of bird in two, according to Martin Schaefer. The Central European Blackcap Warbler is a small bird that spends its summers in southern Germany and Austria. These bird's migration routes are genetically determined and they normally naturally fly 1,000 miles south to Spain in the winter where it is warmer and there is more food.

Over the past 50 years, this natural routine has changed, now 10% to 30% of the species fly, believe it or not, northwest 360 miles to the U.K. for winter. They have been doing this because they are able to find plenty of food supplied by humans in the form of seed and suet. Since the flight from the U.K. to Germany is so much shorter than the fight from Spain to Germany, the birds coming back from the U.K. arrive sooner which makes them more likely to mate with each other. This is causing the birds to develop different characteristics and is called reproductive isolation. Some of the identifying characteristics of the U.K. warblers are shorter rounded wings which allow them to maneuver better without having to fly as far as the spain migrating birds. They also are developing smaller and skinnier beaks because they do not need to eat large fruit and olives. The European Warblers have not split into two different species yet, but could possibly if these changes keep happening and people keep feeding the birds like they are. When the U.K. birds and Spain birds are unable to successfully mate anymore is when they will officially be two different species.

Since we have been studying Darwin and evolution in class i thought this study was very relevant. It shows how much of an impact we are having on our planet that by simply feeding birds we can possibly create a new species. this also shows how delicate our planet is. This study is also interesting because of how fast these changes in the birds are happening. The articles said that the birds started migrating to the U.K. in the 1960's which is only about 50 years ago. Darwin believed that it took much longer than this for a species to change so much, but he probably wasn't taking into account the effect we humans have on other species. I am a strong believer in the theory of evolution so this study makes perfect sense to me and i believe that it is legitimate.

My primary source was an article from Wired magazine. The information from Softpedia was based off of the Wired article so it was virtually the same, just constructed differently. The article from U.S. News and World report was different from the Wired article in that is talked about genetics more. Even though all three of my sources were very similar, I found Wired to be the most straight forward and since I trust Wired magazine for giving me dependable information, I liked it the best.





"How Feeding Birds Splits Them into New Species - The process is being observed by scientists - Softpedia." Latest news - Softpedia. Web. 07 Dec. 2009. <http://news.softpedia.com/news/How-Feeding-Birds-Splits-Them-into-New-Species-128859.shtml>.

Keim, Brandon. "Feeding Birds Could Create New Species." Wired. 3 Dec. 2009. Web. 6 Dec. 2009. <http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/12/bird-feeding-evolution/>.

Milius, Susan. "Bird Feeders, Migration Change May Split a Species." US News and World Report. 4 Dec. 2009. Web. 6 Dec. 2009. <http://www.usnews.com/science/articles/2009/12/04/bird-feeding-migration-change-may-split-a-species.html>.

Andy Goldsworthy

Andy Goldsworthy is an artist who lives in Scotland. He works exclusively in nature, using only natural resources and materials that he finds during his long walks, such as leaves, rocks, ice, reeds, and anything else you can think of that you may find in nature. The majority of the pieces he creates are temporary, and therefore cannot be sold. To overcome this, Goldsworthy takes photos of his work -a whole different piece of art in and of itself- and sells them. He also has released a few movies, that documents the construction of many of his pieces, and also gives him an opportunity to voice what his artwork and what it means to him.
This I think is the most important part of Goldsworthy’s work. For him, creating his work in nature is self-gratifying. It is made clear that the work he does if for himself, and that the photography and movie sales are there because like everyone else, he needs to make a living for himself and his family. I find that this sets him apart from other artists. Certainly, other artists create art for self-gratifying reasons, but it doesn’t seem as genuine as Goldsworthy’s pieces do. With all other art, there is a feeling that in the back of these artists’ minds, they are ultimately wanting it to sell. Goldsworthy doesn’t come across that way, which I think is difficult to find these days.
In Rivers and Tides, Goldsworthy’s most popular movie release, he talks about how his pieces keep him rooted and centered.
The video clip following is the scene of Rivers and Tides where he is speaking about his work, and why he does what he does. It sums up Goldsworthy’s mission in a few short minutes.

None of Goldsworthy’s pieces make use of tools of any kind, outside of his hands. He uses no mortar, nails, or any substance or material that has been processed by man prior to its application. This gives a whole new meaning to his work, that his work is truly born out of nature. It offers the statement that all the resources we need to create such beauty are out there, and one just needs the right perspective and lens to see it through in order for that beauty to come out. I find Goldsworthy to be a visionary, in a very primitive way. People go out of their ways to find innovation through new materials, inventions and so on… but Goldsworthy is still able to find innovation and inspiration in what is older than mankind itself.


Works Cited:

Youtube
National Gallery of Art
Rivers and Tides official website

Darwin Revelation

We witness today more than ever the natural selection of social status. Our society revolves around our class status the same way that Darwin discovered that a female finch chooses which male finch to mate with based on the size, appearance and survival skills of the finch. Social status is similar to Darwin's idea of natural slection because we still base our opinions on beauty and class.
Compared with Darwin's idea of natural selection, we still judge one another based on our success and our status in life. Social status and class are important today since it is known that the class you are born into, either lower class, lower-middle, middle class, upper-middle class or upper class, is typically the class that you will remain in. "Natural selection is the process by which heritable traits that make it more likely for an organism to survive and successfully reproduce become more common in a population over successive generations. It is a key mechanism of evolution" (Natural Selection). These different social standards that we are born into segregate our world by income levels, which prevents some from moving up in the world the way that a finch with a smaller beak has a more difficult time attracting a female finch to mate with.
Most people are middle class, making somewhere between fifty thousand and seventy-five thousand annually in the United States. Our government runs the United States, so that we are born into natural selection not only by our appearance and ability to attract another to reproduce with, but also through our income levels because it is common that the class that you are born into is the class you remain in. People who are born into a wealthy family are given oppertunities that people who are born into the lower income class are not given. They have security that the government protects by lowering the taxes for the wealthy and raising them for the middle class, which doesn't make sense and is the reason for why people have a difficult time becoming a part of a higher income level class.
Darwin's theory of natural selection will always have an impact on our society because it is never going to disappear form our world. All species are going to have a certain "type" that is more common and popular and has more of a chance surviving than others in the same species. In humans we don't only see it through our physical appearance, but also with success and where we are placed within the set class status of the United States.

"Natural Selection." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_selection. 4 Dec. 2009.