Talk about Dysfunctional...

I think it is perfectly reasonable for me to say that the Truebas are the weirdest family I’ve ever heard of. Their actions and deeds are so odd they are almost mind blowing. Esteban has serious anger management, which is pretty clear to everyone, himself included. He can’t truly love anyone, except possibly Alba. Clara is very out of touch with the real world, but communicates great with the spirit world. I think she too is mostly incapable of loving anyone, although she does show care and kindness towards many.

Because of Esteban and Clara, you just know their kids can’t be normal. Blanca seemed to love Pedro when she was younger, but then won’t marry him later because she didn't want to leave her social class and all its luxuries. Jaime and Nicholas have their own peculiar quirks. Nicholas dreams up all these great schemes but somehow they never work. Then he becomes obsessed with some sort of spirituality and moves to Europe. Jaime is extremely dedicated to his work and helping people. If I was forced to pick, I think he is the most normal (its all relative) person in the book. He seems incapable of truly loving anyone, but Amanda may come close.   

The whole family definitely has problems with love. We have all extremes, ranging from not showing any love, to “loving” everyone you see, to infatuation. They rarely talk to each other, and if they do it's usually yelling. They are secretive and don't really know what is going on in each other's lives. All in all, the characters make for interesting reading, because you never know what they will do next.

I've read better

So far, I think The House of the Spirits is ok. Personally I think there are a lot better books out there, but I wouldn’t say that it’s terrible. After the first two chapters I figured I was going to be stuck reading some stupid book for hours, but somehow I made it through a few more chapters. I got a little more into it as I went, and even kind of liked the way Allende writes. She keeps things moving by switching viewpoints frequently. This helps the reader access a character’s inner feelings, instead of a narrator just telling you about them. For example, when Esteban is the narrator, I feel like we know more thoughts and feelings than when he is described in the third person.

I also like the foreshadowing Allende uses. For me, I didn’t really realize how events in the opening chapters would connect back later in the novel. When Clara mentioned there was going to be an earthquake, I figured later on there might be a little quake that wouldn’t really do anything. However, it turned out to be very destructive and hugely impacted peoples’ lives: Nana was killed, Esteban broke every bone in his body, and foreign pamphlets were distributed in the hacienda.

The magical realism throughout the story is definitely different to me. It seems weird that events that cannot happen (Clara playing a closed piano from a different room) are mixed with things that are real and do happen. I think I would like the story better if it was more realistic, because it would be easier to believe it and also to feel a connection with it.

So overall, I have to say this book is mediocre. It’s far better that the The Day of the Locust, but I don’t know if it earns the praise on the back cover.

Leon Golub

Leon Golub created some very thought provoking paintings, showing the horrors of prejudice and oppression.

His paintings are easy for me to understand and interpret. His use of bright colors and large figures helps in this. I think Golub does a really good job of creating lifelike people. For example, the men’s stances and expressions show hatred and contempt for their prisoner. Also, they seem very calloused, like they are used to doing these kind of things. They have no shame as they mercilessly torture and abuse their victims. The prisoner displays helplessness and despair as he sits in the chair masked and tied up.

Another thing I really like about Golub’s paintings is the reality that they show. There really are situations happening in the world that are like the ones he paints. Sometimes it is easy to think only about how nice we have it in America but I think we should realize how bad people in other countries have it. Golub clearly shows the cruelty that can happen and does happen in an oppressive regime.

Most of his works seem to be political, although they do not portray a specific country. The book says that Golub was a major critic of war, especially the Americans in Vietnam. It is easy for me to picture the men in blue as U.S. soldiers who are trying to get information from their Vietnamese prisoner. Overall I think Golub was a good painter who did a great job of showing the public the reality of political oppression.

Interrogation II, 1981

White Squad V,1984

Santiago Calatrava

During the 1960's, architecture began to shift from the boring, boxy skyscrapers to more creative and out of the ordinary buildings. I think Santiago Calatrava’s works are an excellent example of this. He designed the Milwaukee Art Museum in Minnesota, which is located on Lake Michigan. I thought this building was amazing as I was reading through the chapter. It fits perfectly with its surroundings. When I first saw it I immediately thought of a sailboat. It turned out to be a 90 ft. high reception hall that is sheltered with a portable sun screen.

Calatrava said he “worked to infuse the building with a certain sensitivity to the culture of the lake – the boats, the sails, and the always changing landscape”. His ability to blend with the surroundings reminds me of Wright, but their designs are pretty different.

I had never heard of Calatrava, so I researched him. I found out he is considered one of the most elite architects in the world. He was born in Spain and now has offices all over the world. He has designed numerous buildings and bridges and is currently working on a train station at Ground Zero in NYC. Calatrava rarely designs totally enclosed buildings, but instead prefers to make them open.

This picture is one of Calatrava’s works, the Campo Volantin Footbridge in Bilbao, Spain. To me, his works are very unique and pleasing to the eye. They seem light, airy, and sleek, and almost like something is frozen in time. Overall I was very impressed with Calatrava’s amazing work.

1950s Architecture

By the 1950s, architecture was following International Style. This style relied on glass, concrete, and steel to create buildings with high efficiency.  It was very simple and yet also became a symbol of modern wealth and technology.

Van der Rohe was a major leader in International Style. His motto was “less is more” and he designed some simple looking, yet magnificent structures. One of his most famous works is the Seagram Building, shown below. I personally think it is a pretty cool building because of all the black steel and glass. It looks simple but it still catches your eye.

Wright was another famous architect in the 1950s that designed some very creative structures. An example the book uses is the Guggenheim Museum. When I first saw the picture of it, I was impressed. The curved walls and continuous spiral ramp is so original; I don’t think I’ve seen anything like it. The book says that “The Guggenheim remains the definitive example of the modern architectural imagination.”

A third influential man we discussed was Buckminster Fuller. He is mostly known for his massive domes, composed of very strong triangular structures. This fits with International Style in that it uses minimum resources for maximum strength. It also could be very cheaply produced.

Overall, I really enjoy the aspects of International Style of architecture. It is very pleasing to the eye and yet is still cheap and cost effective. Also, architecture seems like it is useful to me. Instead of paintings that really have no relevance to our lives, architecture actually has significance.



Abstract Expressionism

By now, most of you probably know that I am not a huge fan of abstract art. When I saw the section in the book on Abstract Expressionism (pg. 84 -85) it just reminded me how weird this type of art is. It says that this art movement took inspiration on the “nonsensical performances of Dada”. Synonyms of nonsensical include absurd, stupid, and ridiculous. That is pretty much how I feel about Abstract Expressionism.

Abstract Expressionism parallels with physicists’ views of the universe – very random, vague, and disorganized. Most of these paintings are not representational. However, William Kooning’s Woman and Bicycle shows a large woman standing by what is apparently a bicycle. This painting took more than a year and a half to finish, which I thought was incredible. It would seem like in that amount of time, a good artist could create something that was actually worth looking at.

      The Woman and the Bicycle

I feel like it takes very little talent to create these types of works. For example, on page 87, there is a picture of Jackson Pollock “at work”. He is shown standing on a large canvas flinging paint around like a little kid. Maybe this is harder than it looks, but I just don’t see what makes these paintings so special. Overall, I guess I don’t see the value in this art because almost anyone could do it. I would rather place value on a very realistic painting that a talented artist put lots of effort into.

What do you think?

Pollock painting

Photography

I thought the short section on page 64 was an interesting part of this chapter. I think photography is really fascinating because it preserves a part of history for future generations to look at. To me, Migrant Mother captures an unforgettable time in our nation’s history. It shows the discouragement, heartache, and uncertainty people went through during the Great Depression. Dorothea Lange took this timeless picture in California at a work camp. The woman in the picture had six children and had to sell her last possessions in order to feed them.

Personally, I like photography as a form of art much more than any type of abstract works. This simple photo shows more and has more meaning than all Cubism paintings combined. It shows many emotions and feelings that an artist with a brush simply cannot capture. It is easy to understand, and it I can find meaning in it without studying or trying to decipher it.

The book says that “photography was pressed into political service” during the Depression era. This kind of goes back to the idea that we talked about in class about propaganda. I don’t feel like Migrant Mother is propaganda even though the government used it to symbolize how terrible poverty and oppression are. Maybe its different when something is used to promote a good cause. All in all, I thought Migrant Mother and photography in the World War 1/Depression Era was fascinating, and it gets my approval of great art.

Lange has been called the greatest American documentary photographer

Other photos by Lange

More of Lange's photos:

http://www.historyplace.com/unitedstates/lange/index.html