Modernism pertaining to artistic works refers to qualities such as innovation and individualism, use of materials and subject matter in nontraditional ways, and the self-awareness of the art or artist (i.e. challenging the meanings of art). According to the MoMA, the evolution of art into contemporary and modern work began with post-impressionist works such as Cézanne and van Gogh, which then led to cubism, futurism, Dadaism, surrealism, abstract expressionism, etc. Yet, MoMA dedicates an entire room to Claude Monet’s waterlilies (partially because of their iconic presence, but also because of their historical context). Monet’s work of Impressionism retains aspects of Modernism through the innovative style and painting approaches he took. The work which I want to discuss is Monet’s “Agapanthus”, 1914-26, oil on canvas. Like many other Monet paintings, the brushwork is loose, without much concern for capturing life as it is, but rather for capturing the emotion and fleeting aspects of the moment. The representation of water and flowers is suggestive rather than realistic. This suggestive representation shows the focus of art changing from hyperrealism and dramatic scenes, to a calmer modernity of life and the present. The grand allure of this painting is in part of how well it captures a fleeting sense. How it captures a moment of life (which artists later on will then use to fuel their artistic movements). The vivid colors also contribute to this feeling of present life and “the here and now”. It feels like a personal experience to be in front of a Monet. Monet knew his work was nontraditional in style, but like many other innovative artists, he was challenging the idea of an established criteria for art. This painting also has empty edges where there is no paint, which also contributes back to the lack of interest for realism. There is no mistaking this for anything other than a painting on canvas. These qualities of innovation, differentiation, and deviation from the norm all pertain to modernist ideas of art.

Monet Painting Picture

It would not let me upload the image, so I have included the link to it from my Dropbox.

My Mind Map For Mrs. Dalloway

In Freud’s “Family Romances”, he discusses that connection between a child and their family, as well as the child’s search for individuality as they grow older. The child begins their life knowing its parents as a source of knowledge, protection and authority. Parents are the source by which a child begins to understand the world. One of the first conflicts arises from being exposed to other parents and authority figures, to which the child will begin to act critical of their own parents. This makes sense, since the child held their parents in such knowledgeable and authoritative esteem, that any outside influence which can prove otherwise will create a mental conflict. Later in life the child may indulge in daydreams in which the child is either independent from the parents, or given a new and better set of parents. This is a way for the child to imagine greater agency or independence from their parents.

Freud then began to discuss the sexual stage that children go through, where they begin to learn more about a mother’s and father’s role in traditional relationships and then imagine erotic situations with their parental figure. I think that Freud is referring to fantasizing about the roles in which each parent plays rather than the parent themselves. So not the mother herself, but rather a carbon copy which serves to represent the role of the mother in a relationship. These imaginations can also give the child a way to explore their family relations. They could imagine themselves as an only child, or a child in a different family situation. Although these fantasies may seem mean, it’s really just a way for the child to work out thoughts and feelings. This contributes to the child’s individuality as it allows them to explore their own thoughts and their own feelings. The main basis of conflict present for this child first comes from the child admiring their parent, but having to acknowledge that their parent is not perfect. The second form of conflict comes from the child trying to figure out themselves in relation to their siblings and their parents. The rest of the child’s actions and fantasies are meant to help explore those conflicts.

The importance of language is expressed in both “Discourse on the Logic of Language” by M. NourbeSe Philip and “Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass” by Frederick Douglass. They both emphasized the way language shapes identity, community and a sense of self. Throughout her poem, Philip repeats the idea of a “mother tongue” and “father tongue” along with transforming the words of “English language” to “foreign language” to “anguish”. The mother tongue, which can be describes as the language of one’s ancestors, is said to have been denied from the slaves, therefore impacting and altering their connection to their past and their family. Which Philip discusses. Instead, slaves needed to know English, which is the foreign father tongue. Language is a necessary part of human connection, and to deny someone the ability to learn the language of their ancestral past is to deny them a part of themselves. And to deny someone the ability to read and write is a way to deny someone from building community and strong human understandings. The way Philip emphasizes the sounds of language as well as the familial connections of language gives the poem an emotional undertone. Overall it serves to show the way slaves were stolen of their identity through this aspect of language.

Frederick makes similar connection in his narrative. He was inspired to begin learning to read and write firstly by his lesson with Mrs. Auld, and secondly by Mr. Auld’s forbidding of any further lessons. Douglass realized that one of the sources of power for white slave-owner’s was the slave’s denial of education and ability to read and write. These skills became a sources of personal power for Douglass as well as gave him something to work towards for his own identity. Later on he was able to teach other slaves those skills at a Sabbath school while with Master Freeland. One thing Frederick said about that school was how “They came because they wished to learn. Their minds have been starved by their cruel masters. They had been shut up in mental darkness” (49). To give someone the ability to learn, is to give someone the ability to get power and the ability to create ideas for themselves; both things which slave holders knew and therefore kept away from the slaves.

In the pages leading up to the monster’s animation, Frankenstein describe an extreme occupation with the task of creation. Everything else falls to the wayside for the near entire 2 years he worked towards his monster. It almost consumes him. Yet after the monster comes to life, Frankenstein exhibits both elation and intense anxiety, describing that, “the beauty of the dream vanished, and breathless horror and disgust filled my heart. Unable to endure the the aspect of the being I had created, I rushed out of the room…” (35). I always imagine the moments leading up to the monster’s life with a somber and discouraged tone, however afterwords it is almost bittersweet in success and regret. It is easy to see how the two clips dramatize this scene. They both focus on the feeling of power over creation, rather than the fear of it. Especially the clip from the 1994 movie, which really played on heightened sense of power. Even the actor in that clip looks ripped and in amazing health, even though the novel clearly described how Frankenstein let his health degrade due to his obsession. Yet the director, Branagh, wanted to emphasize godly power not only through the act of creating, but be having the actor look powerful as well. The other clip from 1931 almost seems like it wanted to play on the “madness” of Frankenstein. The lab coat, henchman, and strange language all exhibit qualities of a “mad scientist” rather than a man with godly power. However, neither clip showed the anxiety or fear which Mary Shelley describes in the novel.

When I originally heard the phrase, “I am thinking, therefore I exist” (15), I heard it as a variation, which was “I think, therefore I am.” I’ve always understood that phrase as an expression of how our mentality can effect our physically presence. Such as “I think positive thoughts, therefore I am positive.” Or vise versa with negative thoughts. However, after reading this in its original context, it doesn’t quite match up to how I originally thought it to be. Descartes meant it to be a statement of truth, referring to the fact that he himself must exist because of his ability to reflect on his own doubt. It is almost an existential reassurance that if anything in this world is true it is that we ourselves exist. Its strange to now know the true contextual meaning of that phrase, although it is still quite an interesting concept.

Descartes also makes some other interesting statements, such as “People with the strongest reasoning and the most skill at ordering their thoughts so as to make them clear and intelligible are always the most persuasive, even if they speak only a provincial dialect and never learned rhetoric,” (3). As soon as I read that statement it brought a few people to mind whom I felt fit that description. People I know who have a natural talent for communication. I never gave much thought as to why they seemed to be so good at communicating, but as Descartes points out, it is their ability to have a command over their own thoughts and expression of them. At many points during this Discourse, Descartes reflects on the qualities of various persons, including the influence of nurture (one’s environment) on humans. He states that, “Someone who has been brought up from infancy among the French or Germans developed something different from what he would have been if he- the same man, with the same mind- had always lived among the Chinese or among cannibals,” (7). The effect of our upbringing on our beliefs and values is a well known idea. In order for him to try to assess the truths he wants to validate, he acknowledges that what he knows is often an effect of where he has lived and been brought up.

However, one of the ideas in Descartes writing seems hard for me to fully accept. It is where Descartes begins to talk about the differences between humans and beasts, as in the difference of reason and soul. A few points that he made seem to discredit a lot of what we now know about certain animals, including the ability to be self aware as well as problem solve on an extraordinary level. Crows are one of those animals. And there are many other animals, such as gorillas, whom are able to communicate through the use of sign language. It may just very well be that we as humans were able to develop our reasoning and culture purely through evolutionary luck, and there may be the possibility that if other animals had our luck that they too could have developed the complex culture and reasoning that we have. However, I do see his reasoning behind the statement even though I think it could require some updating.

Every morning, for almost two years, I woke up in a room without sunlight. It was expected though. When you choose to have your room in the basement, you must accept things like that. But now, every morning I wake up with enough time to see the sunrise from a room well above the trees. A room from the fifteenth floor of the dormitory.

I was the first born, and then I was the first to go. “Long I was hugg’d close- long and long. Immense have been the preparations for me, faithful and friendly the arms that have helped me” (44). I know it is for the best. There is something that keeps telling me that I am on the right track. “I do not know what it is- but I know it is in me” (50). It tells me that all has a purpose, that this isn’t all for naught.

I ready myself each morning, collecting my self, my things, then heading out on the street. I have a short walk to the nearest subway, which is all part of the experience. Luckily for me, the trees are plenty and there is a garden along the way. Every morning I pass by planted trees, with birds who wait patiently for crumbs to be left behind. “I think I could turn and live with animals, they are so placid and self contain’d. I stand and look at them long and long” (32).

I take the train from 96^th to 23^rd Monday through Friday. At every stop the subway sighs. Exhaling passengers to their destination and inhaling more for their journey. At every stop, there is a hesitation of the subway doors. It is the moment, where the platform persons prepare to board, and the subway riders prepare to leave. In that brief moment I know their impatient thoughts; “Unscrew the locks from the doors, Unscrew the doors themselves from their jams” (24), Release the tension kept stuck by closed doors!

And then the subway breathes and continues on its way.

To observe this is to realize that “there was never anymore inception than there is now, nor any more youth or age than there is now, and there will never be any more perfection than there is now, nor any more heaven or hell than there is now” (3).

It is not long before I reach 23^rd street station, and make my way to the college. That walk is my favorite. I take my earbuds out and, “now I will do nothing but listen” (26). The “sounds of the city, sounds out of the city, sounds of day and night….I hear the chorus, it is a grand opera. Ah this indeed is music- this suits me” (26).  Before I know it, I have arrived. As I head up the stairs to the Baruch building, “the past and present wilt- I have fill’d them, emptied them, and [now] proceed to fill my next fold of the future” (51). A building full of infinite opportunity.

I’ll make the same journey back to my apartment in the evening. When I arrive I am always tired, yet inspired. If I wait patiently enough, and watch night fall on all the city’s buildings, I’ll see the lights begin to turn on from every window, illuminating the city which never sleeps. It’s a wonderful transformation. A real life nightlight, all for me.

Then “I sleep- I sleep long” (50), and dream.