Before reading the Black Panther Party Platform I expected to see a lot of extreme and radical ideas.  After reading I was shocked to see how relevant the issues that were discussed are today. Almost all the points are reasonable yet still not met today, which is crazy considering this was written in the 1960’s.  Number 6 “We Want All Black Men To Be Exempt From Military Service” seems to be the most extreme, but once you read the explanation you can understand it.  If black man do not feel protected by the government why should they be forced to go defend it? Especially with the Vietnam War going on.  Number 8 and 9 go together, again at a quick glance you think this is crazy but considering that most, or all, of these men did not have a fair trial it is reasonable.  Likely these black men had an all-white jury who pinned them as guilty even before they heard the case.  A black man might have a very good explanation or an alibi but the white jury has their mind made up already.  Number 7 “We Want An Immediate End To Police Brutality And Murder Of Black People”  is still such a big problem today and is very sad.

This artwork was created by Jose Clemente Orozco who was a Mexican artist that created political murals during the late 1800’s and early 1900’s. The painting shown above is called “Dive Bomber and Tank”. It was created in 1940 and is a painting that is made out of fresco, which can be spilt by six panels and can be assorted in anyway. If looked at closely you can see the painting consists of materials of war like tanks tracks, airplane tails and wings, and also chains. Another element added to this painting are faces of either humans or masks that show distress and hardship which is probably because of the havoc caused by the war scene. Human legs are also painted into this piece of art, which are put upwards maybe because Jose was trying to show some more negative ideas of what war brings to us and in his perception it seems to be a dead body. Jose did choose to put the legs on top of the set of tank tracks so another thought would be that he was showing a body getting run over by the tank. Another aspect I noticed in his painting was that the face in the middle has what seems to be a horn sticking out his head which makes me wonder if Jose was trying to implement the devil into his painting as well. To top everything off the only color that stands out in his painting is the red which resembles anger, violence and danger which goes hand in hand with his idea of showing war.

I believe radical language is used in the Black Panther Party Platform and SCUM Manifesto because extremism is needed to emphasize on their opinions and beliefs. They feel the need to say things drastic things to make their manifestos stand out and be known. This may bring more attention to their needs and wants. It’s exaggeration in words that can help make things apparent and this is whats used intensely in the SCUM Manifesto. Valerie Solanas was very repulsive in writing her manifesto by writing things like “To call a man an animal is to flatter him; he’s a machine, a walking dildo.” Solanas also reiterated much about men wanting and trying to actually become women since man is the incomplete female. She wrote “Being an incomplete female, the male spends his life attempting to complete himself, to become female.” This type of literature will cause groups of people to become furious, most likely being all males, which in result would bring more attention to the manifesto written. Radical language in the Black Panther Party Platform was also used but not with such offensive vocabulary. They demanded orders in their list by being very assertive rather than a consistency of insulting the opposing party. I believe radical language can be used to some extent but I feel like the way it was used in the manifesto took it too far while in the Black Party Platform it was aggressive and had its ways of degrading the opposing party but was not so direct and unprofessional. Radical language can help get the arguments across because of the awareness it may bring, which should help grow the fighting side.

Before reading this critical essay, I saw Mr. Rochester’s actions towards Antoinette as a result of the fact that Antoinette was a woman. Upon reading this essay, I realized that Mr. Rochester might have acted his, supposed, superiority towards Antoinette due to the fact that she was a woman, creole, and also the fact that Mr. Rochester was forcing upon the English language and culture on Antoinette.

I forgot to take into account that the 19th and 20th centuries were eras of colonization and post colonization. As a result, as an English man, Mr. Rochester was naturally, either consciously or unconsciously, inclined to make Antoinette’s heritage inferior or redundant. As I can see from the novel, the first power Mr. Rochester used to “other” Antoinette’s heritage was through the fact that he kept calling her, “Bertha.” This forced upon the transformation of Antoinette’s identity as, just like Antoinette claimed, Mr. Rochester was trying to changer he personalities by giving her a different name. The efforts of trying to change Antoinette can be seen as, Antoinette who once was sane in Mr. Rochester’s eyes, started to be labelled as insane as she failed to change her identity up to the standards of Mr. Rochester. As a result, I believe that it came to a point that Antoinette was confused between her real identity, Antoinette, and the identity given to her by Mr. Rochester, Bertha.

As a result, I can see that cultural identity, especially due to the colonization and post colonization error, played a huge role in trying to define identities for others. This created the “othering” effect that led to Antoinette being labelled as insane and inferior due to her identity as a woman, creole and non-English.

Trojan Gates (1955) by Helen Frankenthaler is an oil and enamel on canvas, which I interpreted to be depicting two separate individuals whose elbows are linked, but forearms and hands are pulled back and away from each other. The elbows and arms are painted in a color which seems to be black, however from reading the description of the painting, I was informed that the artist actually thinned out her pigments using turpentine, which makes the canvas absorb the pigment much faster and creates a richer color, creating that intense “black” looking color without ever using black pigment. In the background of the painting, there seems to be some sort of gaping white hole, with its rims surrounded by color, almost like an explosion in the sky. This white space, while not in the form of a circle but a more abstract shape, is also found at the bottom of the painting but with little specks of blue, yellow and red within it. There also seems to be a ring around the spot where the elbows are linked, almost in the direct center of the artwork, as if that juncture is supposed to be the focal point of the piece.

I feel like the artwork expresses the meeting of two different worlds and the clash experienced when they converge. Each forearms represents a different world, and the explosions represent the destruction and turmoil that arise as a consequence of their union; the symbolism of the linked arms is interesting because it adds a personal touch/aspect. Perhaps it refers to the unconventional/unwelcomed union of two people, and the public outcry in response.

The concept of American democracy is arguably almost completely derived from basic Enlightenment principles. During the Age of Enlightenment, thinkers including Locke, Montesquieu, and Rousseau among many others, established a foundation for a new kind of society; one where progress in science and technology was celebrated, rulers were chosen by their subjects and through a just process, people were granted basic human rights, knowledge of the self was expanding, land absolute monarchs were figures of the past. These ideas, though they seemed completely foreign at the time, resonated with the masses to incite change and countless revolutionary movements, including but not limited to the American and French Revolutions. The founding fathers of America, when writing the constitution and rebelling against British rule, incorporated the principles and teachings established by Locke, Montesquieu and Rousseau into the foundations of American democracy to create the political system that has survived until today (although, it is uncertain just how much longer it will last given the results of the latest election). This complex political system has served as the quintessence of democracy, for other nations around the globe to follow and model their own infrastructures after. The Enlightenment ideas discussed by thinkers such as Locke, Montesquieu and Rousseau together, paved a “free” society and configured the concept of the “American dream.” When people think of America, many imagine a promising country in which social, economic and personal mobility is fostered and flourishes, which would not be the case had it not been for the Enlightenment thinkers and their ideas.

Colossal Statue of a Pharaoh Seated                                                     (Figure 1)

Granodiorite

Middle Kingdom, Dynasty 12, reign of Amenemhat II (ca. 1919–1885 B.C.) or possibly Senwosret II (ca. 1987–1878 B.C.)

Egypt, probably Tanis (eastern Nile Delta)

This statute of pharaoh Amenemhat II was created to show the power and importance of a pharaoh. The statue is very realistic for the period of time and really shows a powerful man who was very important at the time. The composition, size, proportions, texture, pose, and mood of the statute reflect the greatness and importance of the person that was portrayed.

The dark color of this type of granite gives the statue an appearance that implies fear and greatness. If the statue was made of another type of material of another color it would not have the same effect as the granodiorite color.

The dimensions of a sculpture vary and are often connected to the importance of the statue. If a statue is made for decoration purposes it usually will be of smaller size but if the statue is made to imply power, it will be significantly of greater dimensions.

The proportions of this statue are extremely symmetrical.The symmetry implies order which is the message that a pharaoh would want to send to his people.

The way that the pharaoh is standing in this statue shows his place in the society. Obviously he is a very important person with a lot of authority.  His athletic body has broad shoulders, muscular arms, and powerful knees. With the breast proudly lifted and the abdominal musculature contracted, this ancient ruler seems to be inhaling: he is clearly ready to burst into action.

The Pharaoh looks very serious and his message is clear. He wants everybody to obey to him and take him seriously. The most important aspect of his face that portrays his seriousness is the lips. They are shaped and positioned in a way to make him look very powerful and authoritative.

In conclusion, different elements have contributed in the creation of this statue. Most importantly, in transmitting the powerful effect of the statue to the people. This was a method used in ancient times from the kings and pharaohs to show their authority. Different statues send different messages but in Ancient Egypt they are either used to imply power or they are made as a memorial to the King or Pharaoh after they die.

I visited the MOMA on Saturday May 14, after going through every floor, I chose Picasso’s oil on canvas portrait “Three Musicians”. It was painting while he was with his family in the FountainBleau in the summer of 1921. The picture depicts 3 flat abstract figured men. One playing the guitar one playing the clarinet and the other holding sheets of paper. This is a perfect depiction of Picaso’s cubist style. which is described as a very intellectual style of painting. It is very interesting how picaso makes these real life subjects into different shapes and sizes.

-Optimistic Oliver

The black party as well as scum manifesto use a very extreme radical language to let people know that everyone should be an equal. I was surprised to read that in the SCUM manifesto, women think men are pretty much the bottom of their shoe. But after further analyzation I could see why they think that, even though some men have a great deal of respect for women and their rights, there is also a whole other side, in which men have no respect for women, which is a problem. The SCUM manifesto is very informative for any woman who has ever thought these thoughts and in order for their voices to be heard, there needs to be some vulgar language to express their points. “Every man, deep down, knows he’s a worthless piece of shit”: even though this is very untrue, it definitely gets more women on board to the feminist party, since in reality there are not many people who speak out about this cause. Since many influential black leaders have been assassinated in the past, it is also the black party’s obligation to speak out on their equality, and in my opinion both radical languages in these works, are extremely effective and one of the only ways they can be heard.

Black party and Scum Manifesto use radical language in order for other people to know about them and have their voice be heard , their main problems is that the want to be at the same level as others. Using their  own language for them is a way to show their value or personality even though it might not be appropriate to use. both parties use plural word to emphasize their unity as group and black people fighting for their rights and freedom, also the scum does the same thing because they like to show that their community are all suffering from the same problem. Both parties power is that they all in their group have the same idea which is equality and think that they are being treated different. I think that the reason why both parties use radical language is to be notice and have more attention which is true because a person speaking slowly and using regular and normal language will not get more attention than the person who use inappropriate words. For example during 2016 election the reason why our president elected Trump had more attention from the media and most people was because of his radical language, the word he used to define things and people. This to show both parties uses of such language is just to be more consider and grab more people attention. In my opinion using the radical language is not a good idea to claim a person right or demand because respect is very important and the use of words really matter and are very important especially in our society because education have become very powerful and important in order to success.