So I thought today's discussion was very interesting and not comparable to any other conversation I have had within a classroom. I enjoy discussions more when they never really reach an end point. I feel like the discussion today on the varieties of what is considered public or private, or even a mixture of both never really reached an agreement. Every time someone would make, what I thought was a pretty valid point, someone else would give an example that made me question the first point made which I previously thought was solid. What I'm trying to say is that I find these discussions more enjoyable and more challenging I guess. I think the point that effected me the most was one that Olivia made. Well I think this is what she was sort of getting at, if not then what she said I guess inspired these next thoughts. How much privacy exists in something that was intended to remain public? Just like the "Fuck NEU" message, we established that it is plausible that the author probably had an intended audience (those that use the bathroom), but no one can account for the distribution of the message. Although "Fuck NEU" speaks of a pretty clear message, I guess I mentally compared it to when Kanye West said that Bush doesn't care about black people. It's pretty clear what he meant, but something is always lost in translation. We don't know their true intentions behind those words spoken/written so I guess I think that gives off a sense of privacy. Maybe there is some subliminal message that we are missing and only the author understands. I think the two examples I gave probably aren't the best, but I think you guys get what I mean.
More specifically, take the Mona Lisa. A painting created by Leonardo da Vinci sometime between 1503 and 1506. The biggest discrepancies that come out of this painting are: Who is she to Leonardo? and Why is she smiling? Now I know there has been research done on this and some claim that it is supposed to be a portrait of some guy's wife but I don't think we will ever truly know. Because of this, this extremely worldwide known painting, that has been completely accessible of the public, still maintains some sort of privacy. No one knows exactly what he was thinking when he painted her or why he painted her or who was she to him. So although this painting is public, it holds a lot of privacy. I think this analysis is comparable to almost any form of writing or art. No one is inside the head of the author so something is always lost which I feel creates that sense of privacy. Whether the author has a subliminal message within their work or even the inspirations around a piece of art. Now I'm not going to get into ethos, pathos and logos because I had never heard of those terms before class today, but I'm sure they can be connected to what I'm trying to say somehow. From what I understand, I definitely think that a character is created by both emotion and logic, so I don't think that these three can be separated but I think that a person's character also speaks to a form of privacy, because no two characters can be defined or closely compared.
Francesca, you have a great point by mentioning da Vinci's confidentiality in regards to the Mona Lisa's identity. The Mona Lisa is a symbol of Italian Renaissance art and represents multiple art movements yet however we are really unsure on where this woman stands on society. We simply know nothing about her which only makes her more fascinating in regards to pathos and ethos. Good job.
ReplyDeleteI really like how you reference the Mona Lisa and how though she may be a prominent piece of work that withstood the test of time, she still maintains a privacy that may never be unvailed. The world remains unsure of what the women represents and why she was da Vinci's choice of inspiration, but simply coming to terms with the unknown only makes the viewers more intrigued of the intent behind the work. The paths and logos most definitely paint da Vinci's character, and even that we will never understand.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteFrancesca, I think mentioning the Mona Lisa is a great example of a public piece with a prominent sense of privacy. A picture, like graffiti or street art, isn't expressed with words, which only broadens possible theories behind its meaning(s). I think any form of art, in writing or not, could be considered a public piece. It eventually has opinions formed upon it, correct or not, which creates a public sphere.
ReplyDelete