Spelunking the Universe
Posts tagged Education
Make them Fish.
02 weeks ago
by Rico Penguin
in General
So I don’t know how many of you know this but my main (and only paying) job is Associate Producer for a game company. I spend more of my time talking with users than I do Producing, this means that I’m talking with tens, hundreds, and easily totals of thousands of people. Not all at once, it is a trickle over time. People flow through like the tides, and indeed there are periods where the waves are far less welcome than those before and after them.
During this time I talk with each person in a similar manner. I tell people that I am a mirror, I provide a response that is mirrored to their attitude. Indifferent people get indifference, angry people get stern responses, dull people get dull responses, and so on. This isn’t always true, I do shape it because at the end of the day I am my own person. The trick to working with me is to come to me with positivity, you can be upset, being upset is part of our core. If we are upset about something we are likely passionate about it and that passion is important.
What I will not accept is ignorance. I also don’t let people off easily who expect me to spoon feed them everything. I try to make people fish, I want them to be uncomfortable with ignorance. This is something I feel is very important. Once people get an earnest knot in their stomach when they don’t know something they become something great. These are the people who go on to send people into outer space, to create new means of heating homes, powering our world, feeding our people, and these are the true leaders of our future.
I want people to never accept waiting. Turn to educated people and ask, certainly, but while you wait try and find the answer yourself. Don’t wait for them to shovel the information into your brain, explore and take in the delicious nectar of the stars yourself.
I get the occasional user who is upset with this. But I’m fairly stern about it, once someone is comfortable with ignorance they will carry it to the grave. These people make me endlessly sad and I’ve wasted perhaps far too many minutes trying to drill into them just how destructive that mentality is. Ignorance is bliss, truly, but it requires ever increasing doses. The more people that are ignorant the more bleak the world becomes, these people must then become even more ignorant to keep up the façade of happiness, and the cycle continues ad infinitum until all things end.
Hyperbole? Overly Poetic? Sure, that’s kind of my thing. But this is something that should not be ok. I would love for everyone to be comfortable, but I don’t want anyone ever comfortable with not knowing. I want it to eat away at people, I want it to drive them to learning on their own. I want it to ignite a spark that lights their intellectual fire. I want that burn to spread across the land and engulf their entire world.
I would go so far as to say I would like people to carry this to their death. Because if enough people do it then nobody will ever have to do it again. We are, for lack of a better phrase, truly blessed, extremely fortunate also works actually, either way we are carrying within our own (incredibly) tiny skulls a device that can store and process insane amounts of information.
We have the potency to unravel the fabric of the universe and to do beautiful things. But this will never become commonplace for as long as people are fine with just being fed fish.
Make them fish, make every person you meet fish, give them hints, teach them how to fish, but be hard on them. Don’t let anyone get comfortable with waiting for the answer to fall on their lap. If you work on a forums you push people, count every edit of “I figured it out” as a victory towards the future. If you can 
take them further to explain how it works you will create an internet ripe with data (Even more than it is now).
Don’t ever let up, don’t let any mind end with a question unasked. If enough people are deeply entrenched in the workings of the real world we’ll all be the better for it. Just imagine, if everyone knows what’s going on in politics then nothing can slip in under the radar. If nothing slips in under the radar there is nothing to try and not think about.
If you are left not needing to be ignorant to be happy, is this not the ideal situation? With that in mind, I’m finishing a book at this time, once I’m done I am very excited to talk about Polyface farms. They are certainly a very good reason to live in Virginia or near the DC area.
The Power of a Proper Education
2 years ago
by Rico Penguin
in General
The US and likely most people who are attached to the capitalist system believe that money can heal all wounds. However as nice as that would be it is generally not the case. It is incredibly pleasant for me to see that I’m not the only person that sees this and indeed I’m not the only one that sees the true cure for many many wounds.
The one of the two fellows who spoke at my Graduation Ceremony mentioned that he was running a project to educate Kenyans. This project wasn’t to throw money at them, nor to throw food at them, nor to assign them to any subjective system of beliefs for personal gain. This was and is a system that I can strongly support, the idea of educating the uneducated.
There are no negatives to a proper education, it helps expand the understanding of the world around us as well as our own bodies. A proper education can and will provide people with a better personal attitude. Unfortunately in the US we’ve got small groups of people fighting a proper education in order to push their subjective systems of belief (again for personal gain). But as Mr. Neil DeGrasse Tyson has stated before, nations that break away from scientific discovery also break away from financial security, and he has said that this is why we will never nationally support the destruction of scientific theory or a proper education, rich folk don’t want to die poor.
But back to Africa. There are three major things that every person not only needs but they deserve, without exception. These three major things are Healthcare, Housing, and an Education. There is absolutely no exception at all period. Now I am a bit loose with Housing, because I actually include food under that domain but if we wanted to expand so it was less abuse able, you could say “Healthcare, Housing, Sustenance, and Education.” Regardless all these things are required for a nation to be just and if it doesn’t have ANY piece of these, regardless which one, it is an unfair and unjust society.
In the case of Africa they are largely missing all four. However the foundation for this pyramid is Education, above all else. Without an education the people are left to believe not what is true but what is most convincing, the most charismatic or more likely the most violent rule in lands that are lacking in education. Many times these people are not the best people for the job. With an education comes an understanding of proper healthcare and proper home construction techniques. Renewable systems of living are also built in the architecture of education so that people do not strip the land they live in bare and end up greatly diminishing their chances of survival.
I could go on and on, but it is quite simple, if a nation is to succeed financially and quite frankly in any other sense (even *bleh* morally) they must have a strong and legitimate educational system. Such a system is not a democracy either, just because you do not like Gravity does not mean it doesn’t exist. But that’s a post for another time.
Museums and Architecture Final Paper: Bilbaoblivion
2 years ago
by Rico Penguin
in General
When you walk into the art and museum section of your local library there are a few common themes you will likely always find, collections of classical works, the impact of a particular era of art, and the positive or negative effect of Museum Architecture on the world of Art. I am particularly interested in the latter of these, in the existence of a phenomenon that while not recent has been given a very recent cause. An inevitable destructive force that would bring the end of art as we know it. Seeing as no great event goes without being labeled I’ve coined a term for this destructive force: "Bilbaoblivion". To the astute reader it sounds very much like a museum built by Frank Gehry and indeed this is not on accident. Bilbaoblivion is the inevitable disinterest in the art held within a museum and the greater desire to examine the architecture of the structure itself, it is the gradual decay of art and the construction of museums as sarcophagi for the very art they were built to hold.
In the debate over this there are two basic fields of architecture, one credited with delaying or deterring the Bilbaoblivion and the other credited with bringing the end. The first group, affectionately titled "The Kahn Style" does not only include the works of Louis Kahn but also those like him, creating subtle structures that do little, if anything, more than house the art within them. The second group, is titled "The Guggenheim Style" which includes Frank Lloyd Wright, the aforementioned Frank Gehry and all others who build museums of extravagance.
The term "age old problem" rarely fits as well as it does on this particular subject. Over 200 years ago the first proclamations of the Bilbaoblivion arose. With a collection of over 500 paintings, a structure that was previously a fortress and even a palace, the Louvre is one of the most extravagant and easily the most widely known museum in the world.
Figure 1.1 In fact "Louvre"+"huge" on Google returns 1.3 million results. Louvre alone returns 2.34 Million with almost as many unique images.
Even before any extensions or work were done on the Louvre it was a massive structure, which is to be expected of a palace. All that glitters is not gold however, at least in the eyes of critics. What the Louvre asks of art enthusiasts is "just what is it doing best?" To answer this we must first look at just what a Museum must do to be doing its job well.
1. Display art well (McClellan, 56).
2. Absolutely without architectural adornment (McClellan, 71).
3. Nothing may attract the eye of the visitor from the objects therein displayed (McClellan,71).
It is difficult to define just how one displays art well, however I will assume that by doing the latter two rules you will thusly accomplish the first. Externally it is painfully obvious that the Louvre is indeed not bland, centuries of various delicate tastes have left it a structure of the utmost beauty. During the day it tantalizes visitors with its many forms and structures, not the least of which the massive Pyramid entrance constructed in front of the museum (in image above). During the night the Louvre is a shimmering monument that demands the eye of passersby. So as it stands, the Louvre has indeed failed at the second rule of a properly functioning museum. The next question we must answer is whether or not the museum distracts the visitor from the objects within.
Figure 1.2 Unexpectedly the inside of the Louvre is almost unexplainably modest.
While once again we have elegant archways and beautiful roofing overall the facilities are quite well restrained. However it remains to be answered if the sheer massive size of this structure creates an aura of structural interest. In Figure 1.2 you can see the hallway shrinking dramatically as it travels off into the horizon. Unfortunately for the Louvre however even with this not taken into account the marble finished pillars and embellished archways do indeed draw the eye away from the artwork.
So if the Louvre does indeed fail the latter two stipulations, it must then fail the first. So then does has this structure, that went from 700 pieces to over 35,000 (including the Mona Lisa) and has survived for over 2 centuries, destroyed art as we know it (louvre.fr)?
Globally the answer is no. No conventional entertainment medium in the last 50 years has grown, for the exception of one, The Art Museum. The attendance at museums has risen from 22 million people in the 60′s to a mind boggling 100 million, that is just under one third of the entire US population globally visiting museums (McClellan, tufts.edu). Perhaps coincidentally, the year before this great burst of interest in Museums a particularly famous structure opened its doors. The Solomon R. Guggenheim in New York.
Figure 2.1 The Solomon R. Guggenheim by Frank Lloyd Wright is commonly cited as "one of the most significant architectural icons of the 20th century"
Looking back at our previous rules for a properly functioning museum, and ignoring the fact that the previously mentioned Louvre is the most visited and highest rated museum in the world, we can immediately see that the Guggenheim does not sit well within the status quo. Interestingly for the exception of the labeling on the front of the museum externally the structure is relatively reserved in the context of ornamentation. However the third clause directly conflicted with the goals of Wright when building the museum. When he was building the Museum Wright had the concept of a the Tower of Babel, which (to make a long story short) was a structure that inevitably lead the heavens to spread humanity and complicate their communication. Wright wanted to build a reverse Tower of Babel, a building that instead trickles down from the heavens and helps unite those within it in a common way. The spiral of the structure was in hopes that the museum goers would notice those across from them examining art, an action that most certainly "attract the eye of the visitor from the objects therein displayed " (McClellan, 78).
Figure 2.2 The rings created by the museums build construct segments that Wright hoped would draw ones eye to the common museum goers.
It would be the success of the Guggenheim in New York and the growing interest in Art Museums globally that would slowly begin to raise the collective brows of all city leaders whose funding bubbles had burst from various markets crashing.
One such town in 1997 was suffering not unlike modern day Detroit, what was once a bustling industrial city had watched the market dry up and the industry flee. Unfortunately for all involved; people cannot disjoint themselves from their livelihoods as quickly as the businesses they once worked for. The town’s name was (and indeed is) Bilbao, the building to be constructed is the now famous (perhaps infamous) Bilbao Guggenheim constructed by Frank Gehry.
The initial reasoning behind the construction is admirable enough, the city and provincial governments of the region were very concerned about unemployment (Gausch & Zulaika, 174). When the construction of the Bilbao went underway the hope was that it would bring in roughly 450,000 people in the first year of tourism. The result would be a nice gain in businesses and hopefully a reduction in joblessness. What they got instead was 1.3 million people and 219 million dollars in revenue in the first year. It was such an overwhelming success that the phenomenon was given its own unique name "The Bilbao Effect" (McClellan, 53). It is quite easy to see why after glancing at the structure.
Figure 3.1 Reflecting perfectly upon the water it seems to reach into both reality and surrealism.
With all great successes comes great criticisms and the Guggenheim in Bilbao would certainly be taking the brunt. Upon its completion there was a backlash of Art Enthusiasts who felt that structures such as the Bilbao relayed the wrong message. "Buildings don’t make museums; art and only art does." Similar in tone to the previous 3 rules of a properly functioning museum, this or small variations of this are what comprise the major complaints of the Bilbao (McClellan, 55).
So on the topic of the rules we examine the Bilbao and see how it compares to a properly functioning museum. Interestingly it doesn’t contain outside ornamentation, the structure itself is not unlike the Wright Museum in its smooth (albeit steel instead of concrete) lines. The entire structure is fluid and devoid of any awkward extras such a statues or monuments.
The next question is about internals, will we find endless ornamentation drawing the eye away from the works within?
Figure 3.2 Bleach white walls and an unassuming concrete floor enclose an eye catching piece of art.
While the roof is not flat and featureless it is bleach white which helps lessen the effect of the intricate twists and turns while optimizing the light output. Not necessarily the best possible option, however hardly the museum exhibit nightmare it is often credited as being.
So what is proper? This question has apparently had one real definitive answer and a particularly popular physical example. Louis Kahn’s Kimbell Museum, a structure that has garnered seemingly universal praise as the perfect example of a museum. While easily in itself a monumental structure, it almost magically, achieves an equilibrium between the surrounding environment, the objects, traditions, and modernity. It is these qualities, and likely much more, that brings many people to the works of Louis Kahn when attempting to provide visual examples for how a museum is properly constructed (Loud,*).
Figure 4.1 The outside of the Kimbell Museum is modest and entirely without ornamentation.
The Kimbell Museum quickly answers the question of ornamentation outside of the structure with a resounding no. Indeed the outside of the building is clean and consistent, each barrel vaulted corridor matches up nicely with its neighbors to create a smooth flowing appearance. With the finalization and opening of the Kimbell Museum Kahn had set the stage for what is widely considered the epitome of museum architecture.
So with the outside of the structure quite devoid of distractions, from a technical standpoint, let us now travel within.
Figure 4.2 The innards of the museum are reflective and spacious.
Interestingly the response I got from all parties inquired (Seven if you were curious) to the following question came up the same: "Does the above image exemplify a structure that would create no interest in anything but the artwork?" In each case when I asked this question the response I received was "No". Now it will not be said that the Kimbell Museum is not a magnificent museum, nor will it be said that it does not do what it does incredibly well. However as a structure it is remarkably similar in mentality and design as those of its supposed inverses.
When comparing the Kimbell Museum to the Wright Guggenheim you will immediately notice some striking similarities. Externally both structures are made primarily of concrete, both contain many rounded edges, and both contain sky lighting.
Methodically they are incredibly similar. As stated before the Wright Guggenheim was built with the thought of a reverse tower of Babel, a sort of religious monument in reverse. Kahn himself was inspired during a trip around the world where he experienced firsthand the grand nature of monumental architecture. He was looking to build structures that stood the test of time, that aged not like a fine wine, but like a towering mountain. Endless in their grace and in their form (Nathaniel Kahn,*). So in either case you had large concrete structures rooted strongly in either real or mythological monuments.
Admittedly the connections between the Bilbao Museum and that of the Kimbell would be far more of a stretch to reach. However it takes very little time in the World of Kahn to know that he would have enjoyed the Bilbao. Kahn himself is quoted as saying that a museums purpose as a building is to delight and serve, to not disregard our modern technological and engineering advancements and to take the old traits of domes, vaults, and arches and to place them as giant sculptural forms of the skeleton frame (Kahn,28). Here is a man, long before the Bilbao, describing it and structures like it to a haunting degree. Frank Gehry not only physically build a structure to match these terms but also used the technology of the time to combine a practice millenniums old with technology that is years old.
While he has had countless memorable quotes over his lifetime, perhaps my favorite of Kahn’s is "I merely defend, because I admire, the architect who possesses the will to grow with many angles of our development. For such a man finds himself far ahead of his fellow workers (Kahn,31)". Kahn was not a man of stale repetitiveness, he knew that if nobody ever did anything new we’d never know what we were missing.
While there are similarities between these structures there are likewise differences. The Kimbell Museum is entirely one floor, which provides the Museum goers with a more continuous transition through the works with less downtime. Although an extension is in the works to add a standalone extension to the Kimbell museum that will be multi leveled (Dillard,*). Likewise there is little in the way of emphasis on any particular direction or piece of work. The same cannot be said for either Guggenheim as both are multi level structures and in the case of the Wright Guggenheim there is a very linear direction one can travel.
Another place in which these structures differ is that the Kimbell Museum is free as long as you are checking out the permanent pieces. The Wright Guggenheim costs between 15-18 dollars and the Bilbao costs 7-11.2 dollars. So in this sense it may be the Kimbell that is providing a more consistent space to house and display the works, as cheaper tends to recruit more visitors.
Indeed admissions is an unfortunate sign of the harsh reality that is global economics, most structures cannot survive on good will alone and it is the job of the Museum to attract visitors to raise revenue. If a facility does not do this it will not reasonably be able to continue existing, who then wins when art is left to age in darkness?
It can be said that if the goal of a museum is solely to provide the art to the art viewer then perhaps it is the extravagance of these structures that provides the most proper way possible. Historian Henry-Russell Hitchcock is quoted as saying "A Museum’s purposes are best served, indeed can only be truly served, if it is … entertaining and appealing … the museum … belongs in the field of democratic adult education. Its public ought to be a voluntary one. Therefore, it must practice a judicious showmanship and not be ashamed to entertain in order to teacher (Russel-Hitchcock,86)." It would be unfair, and unrealistic, of me to say that Hitchcock is the final word on what makes a museum, indeed it is on the shoulders of every individual to themselves decide what it is to be a museum to them.
Even the best possible existing example at creating a structure that attracts but does not detract falls short of its goal. Reflective floors and monumental construction put the Kimbell museum in the same boat as its kin. But is this even a problem? In the movie, "My Architect" Nathaniel Kahn the son of Louis Kahn interviews many of the old friends and family of his late Father. A common theme came up during their discussions of Kahn. "He was an Artist."
Is this not true of all Museums? If someone were to paint a building, would that painting not be called art? If that painting is art then one would assume that the things within it have an artistic value. When two pieces of art in a Museum reside near one another, do we blame the more viewed of the two for being too extravagant? Perhaps. However few would demand it be censored because of its intrinsically more interesting qualities. Those that do would not humor similar proclamations about their own works. So then the Museum becomes another piece of art, encompassing all the Art within and around it. It is no more the fault of the Museum than of the Mona Lisa to the works around it.
The greater the pieces of art in a collection the greater the amount of visitors a museum will acquire and with that a large sum to be ascertained. To have a museum of grand nature does not appear to beckon the end of art, but instead a new age of art exhibition. Immense works that demand those nearby to enter. The Bilbaoblivion, like all harks to the end, has been proclaimed with each new unveiling of a structure that differs from conventional beliefs. It is a response that is no different from historical criticisms of works of art and indeed it should be no different as it is complaining about the same thing.
We as a whole fear change, however without it we are left with a dry and predictable world. We find the unfair paradigm of critics demanding museums restrain themselves from extravagance, while on the same breath reprimanding these humble structures when they do not acquire enough viewers or improperly showcasing their works. In the end it is just a fantasy, there is and may likely never be a museum that can accomplish all the goals of a properly functioning museum.
Though even with this opposition the emergence of this new breed of Museum has not faltered. The proverbial wings have spread, and with the art museum population growing each year it is in the interest of every artist that they remain so. For regardless of what critics may feel the job of a museum is, it must bring in money or else it will become nothing more than a vault.
Bibliography
Patricia Cummings Loud, The Art Museums of Louis I. Kahn (Durham: Duke University Press, 1989)
Maria V. Gomez, "Reflective Images: The Case of Urban Regeneration in Glasgow and Bilbao," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 22 (March 1998): 106-21
Louis I. Kahn, Robert C. Twombly, Louis Kahn: essential texts (Edition: illustrated Published by W. W. Norton & Company, 2003) 28 and 31.
Thomas Jessop, Journal d’un vorage a Paris en Septembre-Octobre 1820 (Translated) (Paris, 1928), 28.
Henry-Russel Hitchcock, "Museums in the Modern World," Architectural Review 86 (September 1939): 148
Andrew McClellan, The Art Museum from Boullée to Bilbao Berkeley: University of California Press, 2007. pp. 2, 56, 78, 103
Andrew McClellan, Art Vs. Architecture, Museum designers wrestle with an age-old question: Who’s the star—the building or its contents? http://www.tufts.edu/alumni/magazine/winter2008/features/artarchitecture.html Accessed: Monday, May 11, 2009
My Architect. Dir. Orson Welles. Perfs. Nathaniel Kahn, Louis Kahn. Louis Kahn Project Inc., 2003.
Dillard, Betty. "Kimbell Art Museum reveals $70 million Renzo Piano espansion designs" Fort Worth Business Press 2008. 6/9/2009 <http://www.fwbusinesspress.com/display.php?id=8916>.
Images brought to you By:
Figure 1.1 – http://www.davidedc.com/photos/photoBunker/Louvre3-Big.jpg
Figure 1.2 – http://pix.alaporte.net/pub/d/4265-1/Inside+the+Louvre.JPG
Figure 2.1 – http://www.ny.com/museums/images/guggenheim-lg.jpg
Figure 2.2 – Your Lecture Notes
Figure 3.1 – http://contrainformation.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/bilbao.jpg
Figure 3.2 – http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_9V80FUjOCNE/Sfl2JxRyyvI/AAAAAAAAACo/EudcBNyj4Xc/s1600-h/galeria_audiovisual.jpg
Figure 4.1 – http://www.texaswhitehouse.com/images/kimbell3.jpg
Figure 4.2 – Your Lecture Notes
Disclaimer:
This paper was written in good faith (always wondered what that means) and all effort was put towards citing and citing properly, in any and all cases where this may have been missed (I doubt there are any) it was entirely a mistake and the original speaking parties are herein granted full credit for their comments.
In not so serious business, this was an incredibly pleasant experience and while the paper did shave a few years off my life with stress I got to see many wonderful images of some of my favorite Architects. Sometimes you need to take the bad to get some good I suppose.
If you take out all the images the paper should be between 10 and 11 pages long (not counting citations or this stuff), and Swiss Cheese is an amazing cheese. That is all.
Classical Imagery Renaissance – The Final: Part 2 of 2
2 years ago
by Rico Penguin
in General
So I’ve spent much of the morning working on the following animation to showcase the major events of the Renaissance. It’s a little bit better than the previous one and this time all the dates are spot on with a little commentary at the bottom. This should be just weird enough to stick in your (and hopefully my) mind.
So lets see. Where should we go next now that that is done (this thing is roughly a minute and a half long and it took me hours to complete).
Real quickly lets do a crash course through the paintings that were on the last exam and are likely to show their face again.
This is the Primavera, from right to left we have Zephyr, Chloris, Flora, Venus (Below), Cupid (Above), the Three Graces, and Hermes.
This is Pallas (Athena) and the Centaur, from right to left you have Pallas (Athena) and the Centaur. I’m sure you figured that out though.
This is the Birth of Venus, from right to left we have Hour (a season), Venus, Zephyr (Male) and Zephyr (female). This one raises some confusion since the winds are blowing flowers (like Flora) and the season or Hour looks like…well Flora. Methinks that Botticelli was just horny for Flora in general.
This is Leonardo’s Vitruvian Man, he is 8 heads tall and fits perfectly within a square and a circle (considered to be the two most sanctimonious shapes). Now I would like to take this moment to say shame on Microsoft for not having Vitruvian in their dictionary.
That is the Florence baptistry, it makes a lot of sense why it would have been used for Linear Perspective. You can attribute two big events, the battle of Ghiberti and Brunellesci as well as the discovery of LP to this structure. So its a nice way to keep multitudes of information in your brain.
Massacio’s Tribute Money is a great example of Horizon Line Isocephaly, in other words the horizon line is at the head height of the figures and more importantly all the angles should point your eyes to Jesus. He was always a sucker for attention.
Pietro Perugino’s Peter Receiving the Keys, easy to remember as it is someone retrieving keys, Also Pietro and Peter kind of sound the same. The horizon line here is at the doorway to the building in the back (that looks a lot like the baptistry). Follow the tiles on the ground for confirmation.
Leonardo’s Last Supper is another example of using Isocephaly and Linear Perspective to draw everyone’s eye to Jesus. It makes sense, if you are going to do a picture of Jesus you figure he’ll be the main point of the image.
On your left is Brunelleschi’s entry for the baptistry and on the right is Ghiberti. The level of detail on Ghiberti’s is likely what got him the win.
Massacio’s Holy Trinity is another example of using LP to draw the eye to Jesus. Although I’m not sure why there is such an attraction to the whole…you know…dead or dying Jesus.
On your left you have Donatello’s take at David. Standing over the decapitated head of Goliath. I was under the impression that he wore clothes and didn’t use weaponry outside of a sling and stone but maybe I’m just misinformed (likely). On your right you have Verocchio’s take on David, has armor but it is skin tight and once again standing over a decapitated head of Goliath. Finally you have Michelangelo’s David. He opted for a more adult dude, but naked nonetheless.
This is Donatello’s St. George, I know I won’t remember his name well but hopefully you will. I suppose the cross on his shield should help remember the sainthood.
We begin with Verocchio’s mobster looking “Colleoni Monument” followed by Donatello’s Awesomely named “Gattamelata” in the middle, and Marcus Aurelius by…someone?
We have both sides of the Medici chapel here done by Michelangelo. The four naked folks underneath the two Medici are the times of day, on the left you have day and night and on the right you have morning and evening.
In both of these pictures you have St. Bernard talking with the Virgin Mary in works titled “Vision of St. Bernard”. On left you have Filippo Lippi’s version and on the right is Pietro Perugino. Notice the softer tones of Perugino’s work. That is what sets him apart from the more harsh works of the time (line wise).
Albrecht Durer’s Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, then Knight, Death, and the Devil, and Adam and Eve. Try and remember these four, his works are sort of unique in that they are all grayscale and sharp drawn so it should be easy to punch him onto them.
Hugo van der Goes “Portinari Altar” is an example of someone influencing those in Italy rather than the reverse happening. His influence can be seen most prominently in the following.
You’ll notice those three dudes on the right and the troth being in both images. This one is done by Domenico Ghirlandaio.
Shooting for the worlds most complicated name Antonio del Pollaiuolo is the artist behind both the sculpture and the painting. Each showing the battle of Hercules vs. Antaeus.
Lastly we have 4 works (one you’ve seen before) apparently nobody knows who did them but they are all four important and their names should be on your mind if you are taking the exam.
v
The first is Marcus Aurelius, followed by Belvedere Apollo and the Belvedere Torso, and finally the Laocoon Group.
I hope I’ve hit everything. If anyone who is taking the exam noticed some big holes feel free to send me an email and I’ll put them up. I too will be looking at this before the exam to refresh my memory 
.
PS. That reminds me. Important to remember, Verrochio was Leonardo’s Teacher, Ghirlandaio was Michelangelo’s Teacher, and Perugino was Raphael’s. Just remember that daio sounds like angelo, Perugino and Raphael have p’s and r’s in their names, and that Rochio and Nardo are similar. Or you could just be a good student and remember them the old fashion way. But you know how that is 
.
Classical Imagery Renaissance – The Final: Part 1 of 2
2 years ago
by Rico Penguin
in General
Tonight I’ll be discussing all of the non image related pieces for the final exam for CIR. Tomorrow I’ll be examining (early in the morning) the layover from the previous exam and make a new animated timeline to lay out all the important dates for the final.
It’s a shame this class is ending but I suppose that’s the way of things. So lets at least leave with an informational bang.
To begin we will take a crash course through the liberal arts, as stated before there are 7 Liberal Arts. No more and no less, if you know anyone who is talking about Liberal Arts do a quick check that they can name the stuff and if they can’t just ignore them.
The first set is called the Trivium, this I believe is latin for “Three Roads”. In Order you have Grammar, easily remembered because you get beaten for not remembering Grammar in Grammar School (well used to), It is followed by Dialectic or more specifically Dialectic (Logic) which is not surprising since it is Philosophers favorite tool, they spread the worth of this tool with the final of the Trivium which is Rhetoric. Easy Peezy Folks.
The Second Set is called the Quadrivium, or the Four Roads. In Order you have Arithmetic, which naturally leads into Geometry, which itself leads naturally into Astronomy. Because each is fulfilled to a great extent by its former, after these three you have the case of Music. That may seem ‘odd’ but you should also know that they mean more the mathematical and technical help that Music gives, such as plucking a line to check the tension or to work balance, or following the chirp of a metronome to accomplish a difficult task.
When looking at Rennaissance paintings there are 3 vital points to look for, the first is Linear Perspective, established after 1425 (more on that tomorrow), the second is classical forms (Greco-roman stuff), and finally anatomy. These are not necessary in any particular order but they all three are necessary. Not that it matters but these were established by Ernst Gombrich. If you need a mnemonic, it would be L.A.C., Linear Perspective, Anatomy, and Classical Forms. I doubt you’ll need it but it could help.
Neo-Platonism is one of the many faith structures that looks at life as a substandard situation only alleviated with death. Specifically it has 4 planes to deal with. You begin with the highest level known as the Cosmic Mind, understandably this is an area of pure knowledge (what could be better to philosophers I suppose). Next you have the Cosmic Soul, the place where all the causes of the lower two levels are dictated. After this you enter Nature, which is essentially the play dough area where forms are squished into matter to make everything we see around us. At the bottom of this entire thing is the Realm of Matter, non-living material. Which interestingly enough is actually more close to reality than you might think. But that’s a discussion for another day. Essentially we are at the bottom looking up. Through Philosophy we can spread our love to god and for whatever reason God is just chillin’ pouring love down. It’s like trickle down economics.
Finally tonight I’ll finish with Isocephaly. Whenever you are looking at a painting and notice a bunch of heads all on the same line you are most likely looking at a case of Isocephaly and that can generally help you find the vanishing point. Other tools are using regions of the painting that you can discern such as tiling on the floor and falling their angles till you reach a singular point. I’m sure most people here know how to find vanishing points.
Alright. I’ll see you all tomorrow. I’ll be finishing this up and discussing the first half of the final for Dinosaurs and their Environment.
7 Days of Dinosaurs (Day 3)
2 years ago
by Rico Penguin
in General
Characteristics of Ornithischia
There are some important things to know about Ornithischia when you are confronted by them. Well firstly I’d check your BAC but after that remember that all of them are Herbivores. Keep in mind that generally speaking you are more likely to be killed by Herbivores than Carnivores (they are aggressive enough to dwarf the hunger of many Carnivores). The had something called Ossified tendons up and down their spines. Now I don’t quite understand what this is yet. I’d look online but frankly I’m hoping to have it unraveled to me in the course. An image from future slides is as follows.
It is even nice enough to point out the tendons, you’ll notice the cross hatching of them. Fascinating stuff. They possessed a horny bill on the front of their lower jaw. Think Triceratops if you want a quick (and relatively universal) visual.
Finally they had their backwards pointing pubis bones. Which was more birdlike, which if memory serves, is where the orni comes in.
Now I’m going to have to actually put the rest of these on hold. I’ve been stepping beyond my knowledge level in these latest questions and there is no reason to misinform myself and others. But this will most certainly be re-touched on.
So unlike the dinosaurs this shouldn’t end up extinct, just delayed. Who knows what tomorrow holds.
7 Days of Dinosaurs (Day 2)
2 years ago
by Rico Penguin
in General
What are the distinctions between the Sauropod groups Brachiosauridae, and Diplodocidae?
This one is probably going to be short but it’ll be fun. You likely saw some images last time so I won’t repost them however the skulls are different.
From the first group of Camarasaurs you have the Camarasauridae (which we aren’t learning about) and the Brachiosauridae which we are. Of these the special characteristics consist of demarcated snouts (check a dictionary I actually don’t know haha), chisel-like teeth in the entire mouth, they have longer front limbs than back ones, and finally they are heavier than the Diplodocidae (and Titanosaurs in general).
Now unintuitively so the Titanosaurs are as stated before lighter than the Camarasaurs, of which the Titanosaurs comprise two different sub groups. You have the Titanosauridae which we aren’t interested in (because its not part of the Exam) and the Diplodocidae. With the Diplodocidae you have special traits of long broad noses, nostrils on the top of their head as opposed to front, pencil-like teeth instead of chisel like (big difference trust me), teeth at the front of the jaw (looks pretty weird to me brown skull on last post set is of this), long and slender fellows, and they have a V-shaped neural spine on the neck that is pretty neat. If it doesn’t come up later, that neural spine is likely for the attachment of that ligament from the previous post. When thinking of cranes you get a general idea of how handy a series of wires like that would be.
I believe that is it for now. I hope you enjoyed this little foray into information about dinosaurs. Oh and so you get SOME sort of visual fun out of this lemme grab an image from our slides for you.
Good stuff.
Dinosaurs and Their Environment – Exam #1 (Part 1.5-2)
2 years ago
by Rico Penguin
in General
What are signs of a fast animal and what indicates their primary food source (carnivore, herbivore, omnivore)?
When looking at an animal there are initial obvious hints. The stockier and thicker the bone the slower overall the animal will be. Now relative to humans just about any big animal will still stomp a hole through your torso if you try to slap them on the butt and run. A good rule of thumb when looking at the legs of an animal, the more ‘hinge points’ it has the faster the animal will move. Each hinge region (like your knee) essentially becomes a spring that helps an animal move much faster than even their muscles alone would allow. In Martial arts, people are told to stay on their toes which adds a new hinge at the Ankle.
When looking for hints on the primary food source of an animal you check their teeth. It is the first place food goes for processing (Well the mouth is) and thusly the best place to learn about the animals favorite snacks. Plant eaters will almost always have flat teeth, like a mouth full of molars. This is for grinding up plants and other soft organic material. Carnivores will have some gnarly fangs (canines) that are used for shearing, crushing, and otherwise maiming their prey. The larger the teeth generally the larger the prey. If the creature had raisin sized teeth you could expect they ate insects. Omnivores have clippers in the front usually and grinders in the back (like you or me).
Linnean classification and cladistic classification, The meaning of general and specific characters, How to construct and use a cladogram, and What are the closest living relatives of dinosaurs?
Linnean classification is the one that everyone is familiar with, the whole kingdom phylum order genus species thing. I probably missed a few and ordered it wrong but you get the idea. I’m just proud of myself for remembering that many pieces. Cladistic classification is actually a bit weird and sort of the species equivelant of being racist. To me at least.
When looking at Cladistic classification you have two groups of examination, the General Characteristics and the Specific Characteristics. The general being things that an animal has, like bipedal movement, something that helps describe the animal but doesn’t solidify its rankings in uniqueness and the Specific like the opposable thumb which is purely a human characteristic. It’s neat stuff but you have to be cautious to not use terms so broad (such as having a heart) that they are meanginless.
Cladograms are basically line charts that take a group of similar animals, that is animals that share a ton of general characteristics, and organizing them through a system of Specific characteristics. For instance you might work from say a T-rex and slowly move towards its nearest modern relative. Along the way picking out the characteristic that it and all the animals before it have but none of the ones after it do. It would look something like this.
While not very similar, the way this works is that you start with a backbone for fish, which is something all animals above it have but none before it, then you move to legs with Lizards and above have but Fish do not, then you move to hair which Dogs and above have but Lizards and below do not, then finally the Opposable thumb. Which where you start is somewhat arbitrary it helps to put like items together.
One of the professors more detailed examples is below:
![clip_image002[4]](http://www.islesofscion.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/clip-image0024.jpg "clip_image002[4]")
What is a tetrapod? What are the characteristics of a tetrapod that set it apart from a fish? How did tetrapods evolve from fish?
A tetrapod, literally four legged creature, the major separation that I can think of that separates them from fish is that they have legs with fin like appendages (when dealing with water) whereas Fish literally have fins. Fish also have much thinner skeletal structures because most weight is supported by water. They also tend to have massive heads to body ratios. The evolution was likely the transition from fin to fin like appendage to appendage.
What are Behaviors of crocodiles that separate them from other reptiles?
They tend to use pack behavior (pretty efficiently), they vocalize (albeit not exactly eloquently), and take care of their babies after they hatch. It’s pretty cute to watch…all things considered.
What is erect stance and what are its advantages? What tetrapod groups do and do not have erect stance?
An erect stance is any creature that stands at or near verticle with two limbs that are the primary source of motion and a second set of limbs that is primarily used for grasping. Of the saurischian (lizard hipped dinos) prosaurupods and theropods were bipedal, of the Ornithischian (bird hipped dinos) the Ornithopods were bipedal. All other options were quadrapedal.
How do Saurischia and Ornithischia differ?
As stated before, Saura were the lizard hipped and the Ornith were bird hipped. Has to do with the direction of the Pubis. With the bird hipped having it pointing it back, the others having it pointing down or forward.
What are the names of the Era, periods and dates of the periods when dinosaurs were alive?
Now this part is a bit hard to remember. Basically working backwards keep adding 65 million years and you’ll get ‘close’ to the right years. 65 Million years ago was the end of the Cretaceous, which was the fall of the dinosaurs, 144 million years ago was the end of the Jurassic which was the time we built a park full of dinosaurs (wait a second), 208 million years ago was the end of the Triassic period, and 245 million years ago was the end of the Permian and more importantly the start of the dinos. If you are taking a multiple choice you should be able to get close to these dates by just remembering 65 MYA and keep adding 65 . Or maybe more accurately adding 50.
Coelurosauria vs Carnosaur
Coelursauria is a group of Theropods that are identifiable by their (generally speaking) long necks, small heads, gangly arms, and small size. Carnosaurs are your T-Rex’s and Allosaurus’s. Big mofo’s that have lots of big stuff and tiny ass arms.
Attack methods of carnosaurs (a term which describes shape but has no cladistic/evolutionary significance)?
I’m not sure what this question means. But we theorized in class that various carnivores of modern day may give us a good idea of how carnosaurs hunted. It is unlikely that they acted like fast animals given their size and more than likely were hunting relatively slow prey.
Compare and contrast Allosaurus and Tyrannosaurus
Tyrannosaurus has a huge strong head whereas the Allosaurus has a smaller head that is not as good at surviving side torque of a moving prey. The Tyrannosaurus also has much larger teeth and is overall larger. The teeth on the T-rex look like big fat fangs whereas the smaller Allosaur teeth are more bladelike. Allosaurus has longer arms too, so he could possibly scratch his itchy knee . The T-rex probably took a more gator like approach to killing while the Allosaur may have acted more like a large raptor or something similar, using its arms and head.
Evidence for stance and pack behavior in carnosaurs.
The size of the creatures suggests that they weren’t super fast, their bodies just wouldn’t do well to support the weight at high speeds. Likewise considering their similarities to crocs it would seem reasonable to assume that they too act in pack patterns. Also there have been Carnosaurs that have been found with healed broken tibias which really would only happen if there was a pack looking out for one another. As for stance, a T-Rex couldn’t stand upright, it would be putting most of its weight on the weakest part of its Hip and likewise it would have to snap its own tail (fracture it) just to bend it along the ground like they often show them in museums.
Know the conditions of Sue’s skeleton and the other individuals she was preserved with.
Sue has multiple conditions in her bones that show she likely suffered disease. She had a broken and healed tail, broken and healed ribs, and broken or malformed tooth. She even had bite marks that looked like another t-rex had bit her neck (A little too kinky for my tastes).
What kind of dinosaur is T. rex most closely related to?
T-Rex is more closely related to various coelurasaurs than it is to other carnosaurs. Even the cute little compy is more closely related to it than Allosaur. According to Cladograms at least.
What is the evidence for how carnosaurs held their backbone?
As stated before it had to do with the strong and weak points in their hips and the flexibility of their tails. They most likely leaned forward using their tails to balance the wait of their front leaning body and head.
How did Oviraptor live?
Oviraptors Their unfortunate skull structure made people incorrectly label them as egg eaters, in actuality they probably used their beaks to crush shelled creatures. For those that think I might be exaggerating.
How did Ornithomimosaurs and Dromaeosaurs live?
Ornithomimosaurs were the dinosaur equivelant to the Ostrich. They share very common body types and were likely very fast. They probably ate plants, insects, and other small things. Dromaeosaurs are actually what were incorrectly labeled velociraptors in Jurassic Park! 
. Not only were they wrongly labeled but the ones in the move were even increased in size by a few feet to make them look more menacing. So imagine a small version of those dinosaurs and you have them.
On a somewhat unrelated note imagine this chasing your butt:
![clip_image002[6]](http://www.islesofscion.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/clip-image0026.jpg "clip_image002[6]")
Principles of size, volume and surface area relationships. Be able to estimate weight of an object based on increase in a linear dimension, e.g. I have a cube that is 2 inches on a side and weighs 1 lb. How much would a cube of the same material weigh if it was 4 inches on a side?
The size of a 3 dimensional object grows disproportionately in respect to the volume vs surface area. The volume goes up to the power of 3 whereas the surface area goes up to the power of 2. So an object that is 2 inches on the side and weights 1 lb would result in a 1lb for every 8 cubic inches. With this in mind a 4 inch cubed object has a total of 64 total cubic inches, that is 8 times larger so 8 lbs.
Early evolution of feathers and their purpose
Feathers initially were more than likely downy and used for keeping animals insulated. As time progressed some animals probably grew longer feathers in order to glide from trees to catch certain flying insects and animals…oh and to surprise and catch non flying animals . Eventually you’d have flight.
Birds, characteristics of, and origins.
The first bird is the Archeopteryx, well bird-like dinosaurs. Beak like mouths, long asymmetrical feathers and an in between stage of the hand that is very similar to bird like hands.
What is the first “bird” and what dinosaur group is it most closely related to?
I think that my previous answer still fits here. If not that’ll be something on the exam I get wrong . Most closely related to Coelurasaurs.
What are the characteristics of Archeopteryx that make it bird-like and what makes it dinosaur-like?
Feathers, Backward Pubis, bird like feet (3 toes front 1 toe back), all make it bird like. Teeth, distinct fingers, and a Gastralia make it dino like 
.
Dinosaurs and Their Environment – Exam #1
2 years ago
by Rico Penguin
in General
Now quite honestly I had forgotten this is Wednesday. I really wish that was not the case. However over the next two days I’ll be covering the 6 chapters of info that will be in the exam. Hopefully it’ll all come to a better end than the one Dinosaurs succumbed.
With 6 chapters to look over we split it cleanly down the middle. Today we’ll be discussing the Skeleton (hardest part), Classification and Relationships of Vertebrates (Step down in Hardness), and the Origin of Dinosaurs.
Tomorrow you will (as well as I) be dealing with Size and Volume (Not too bad), Theropods-Carnosaurs (T-Rex And Friends), and Theropods-Coelosaurs (Raptors and Friends). Any errors in these headings will be corrected tomorrow as I go over the topics.
The questions are from the study guide and I’ll be trying to answer them to the best of my abilities with the notes.
What are the various Modes of fossilization? What are the best conditions for preservation?
While I’d like to be creative and start from the least efficient and work up to the best we’ll do a downward spiral instead. The first method of fossilization is the best, known as unaltered, it is called such because as best as one can hope the organism has come from the past to the present with the absolute least amount of damage (mostly genetic). Insects that are trapped in Amber (or other small animals) is a great example of unaltered fossilization. The next of these unaltered situations is freezing, which also retains much of an organisms parts (not so much and not so long as the amber would), and finally bog mummies. What all these things have in common is that they are extremely low oxygen environments (perhaps extreme is a strong word), in the case of the bog people the environment is also acidic, and in the case of bog and ice it is a cool environment. All these things reduce the speed of degradation, bacteria is not very happy in any of these environments.
A fun, if not disturbing, bit of info is that in an oxygen free environment a condition known as saponification happens, essentially the fatty tissues of a body turn into a soap like matter. So perhaps the name eludes to the end result . Likewise desocate refers to mummification which is another efficient way to preserve bodies (as Egyptians have shown).
Moving onto a replacement like preservation (the one more people are actually familiar with). When organic material like leaves are buried, they’ll eventually be pressed and degrade until all that is left is a carbon film, it ends up looking like a photograph.
Per mineralization is a similar (to me) system where the pores in organic matter is filled with minerals, usually silicon, when you think about dinosaurs that are well preserved this is likely the cause. If it isn’t you have a case of molds and casts, the bones and other matter just completely decay (as they should, bone is very organic) leaving a hole in the ground that tends to be filled with a different concentration of minerals. As far as I know, there is no actual dinosaur bone found anymore, just very well preserved casts. That may indeed be wrong but its what I’ve taken away thus far from the class.
Another fun note is that skin, feathers, eggs, nests and turds can still be recovered from very very old animals in the right environment.
What are the Characteristics of bones, tendons, and ligaments? What are the names of all the major bones in a Dinosaurs body (and consequently most animals)?
When thinking about bones in the general sense you tend to have a very thick and good-for-clubbing outer layer that surrounds a spongy inner layer (that any lion will tell you is delicious). There are variances in both of these factors when talking about birds (which are much lighter all around), or elephants (which are much thicker in general). When I see a cross sectioned bird bone it reminds me of those cupcakes that were a little ‘too airy’ that you bit into and find nothing but an empty chasm inside. Which in terms of cupcakes is tragic.
Tendons are the wonderful little ties that connect muscles to bones, these are one of the reasons you have bones in the first place. If your muscles could retain shape without the framework of bones you’d have no need for tendons either…which may sound a bit stupid in retrospect but its just a bit of info out of the ole brain here. Next you have Ligaments which connects bones to bones, which together with tendons and bones helps fulfill all the basic requirements for building an organism (structurally speaking…not functionally).
The part I was dreading comes next. There are 30 major bones in a dinosaurs body. Lets see if I can find an easy way to name them all.
We’ll separate it into 5 parts, you have the head region, the torso, arms+hands, legs+feet, and tail. Vertebrae is actually split into 4 pieces. With this in mind it would go as follows.
Head:
Maxilla is the top half of a skull more specifically the upper jaw.
Mandible is the bottom half (otherwise known as the lower Jaw).
Cranium is the…well it is the Cranium, what we commonly call our skulls.
Torso:
Cervical Vertebrae is the first of 4 sections of the spine+tail, it consists of the spine between the base of the cranium and the shoulder region.
Dorsal (Trunk) Vertabrae is the second of 4 sections of the spine+tail, it consists of the space between the shoulders and the top of the hips (well right up util that point).
Ribs are the ribs and if you are curious what they look like check out a snake skeleton, those guys are made of basically nothing but ribs.
Arms+Hands:
Scapula is the first part of what is the arm, I believe the slang term for it is “shoulder blade” but I may be wrong there.
Coracoid is the bone that connects your shoulder blade to the arm. I think, that’s a complete guess honestly, I look on wikipedia and I’m still kind of lost. It’s there though (as you’ll see in a picture later).
Humerus AKA the Funny Bone, is the top bone in your arm.
Radius, one of two bones in the lower half of your arm, to identify it remember radius to Pinky.
Ulna, the other of the two bones, to identify it remember Ulna to thumb.
Carpals, those first bones in the hand.
Metacarpals, the second set of bones in your hand.
Phalanges (In the Hand), the tips of your fingers, perhaps even your whole finger. (I think it actually is the entire finger).
Legs+Hands:
Sacral (Sacrum) Vertebrae is the third part of the spine that consists of the hip region.
Ilium working clockwise it is the top of the 3 pieces of the pelvic region.
Pubis the next bone working clockwise in the pelvic region.
Ischium the final bone in the clockwise scan of the pelvic region.
Femur, the largest single bone in the Human body, great for clubbing.
Tibia, the front bone in the lower portion of your leg. Break this and you are in for some serious recovery.
Fibula, the back bone in the lower portion of your leg. Breaking it isn’t quite as bad but still sucks.
Tarsals, the top bones in your footsies.
Metatarsals, the bottom bones in your footies.
Phalanges (In the Foot), the little piggies from that horrible horrible children’s song.
Tail:
Caudal (Tail) Vertabrae is essentially the tail. In raptors it is fused at about halfway down to the tip making it like a rod.
Haemal Arches are what I believe to be the ‘ribs’ of the tail. For keeping it nice and sturdy.
Below is an image to help clear up my terrible descriptions.
Because of time constraints the following will be on tomorrows lecture as well. Good thing I’m starting very early.
What are signs of a fast animal and what indicates their primary food source (carnivore, herbivore, omnivore)? Linnean classification and cladistic classification, The meaning of general and specific characters, How to construct and use a cladogram, and What are the closest living relatives of dinosaurs? What is a tetrapod? What are the characteristics of a tetrapod that set it apart from a fish? How did tetrapods evolve from fish?What are Behaviors of crocodiles that separate them from other reptiles? What is erect stance and what are its advantages? What tetrapod groups do and do not have erect stance? How do Saurischia and Ornithischia differ? What are the names of the Era, periods and dates of the periods when dinosaurs were alive?
Educational Aggravation Overly Exaggerated?
2 years ago
by Rico Penguin
in General
This is one of those things that may indeed make me look a little insensitive. Indeed perhaps that is the case. However I am at a loss when I read articles like this. When I was younger I got called basically anything you can imagine. Fag, Queer, Gay, and Homo, indeed I was called basically everything there is to call someone (without being positive). Did it hit me and bounce off because of my rubbery exterior and stick to all those sticky glue ridden baddies? Well no indeed it hurt me deeply for a good while. However, never at even the worst point, did I ever even think about killing myself. Frankly people just aren’t worth that much investment.
I don’t quite get the generation that is a sneeze after mine. I remember Columbine when I was in Junior High and how a group of 5 (or was it more?) kids were all emotional because they didn’t have any friends. I looked and realized that I only had at best 2 to 3 people I could really truly call friends, the rest were friends by circumstance. However, while I might have written about the doom and gloom, I hardly felt it. It was more like a responsibility, it always just seemed right to articulate the macabre world I felt growing around me. That’s what I do, I try and convert what I feel or think into text because while I may be fragile and mortal the words that leave me are far less so.
So when did people become so dependent on the recognition of obnoxious pricks? When did we prioritize people that frankly don’t matter? Those cool kids you met in junior high and/or high school are probably working at a McDonalds now. Their personalities are toxic and frankly the only reason they worked in school was because they were butt to butt with a ton of people. When you have that kind of concentration of folks in a region you are bound to find someone who enjoys your dry comedy and ability to notice imperfections in people. Which really isn’t that hard seeing as likely less than a percent of the world population has anywhere near symmetry in their bodies. The rest of us have discrepancies ranging from a few millimeters to perhaps an entire inch or more.
For me in school the revelation, that change came the moment I personally realized that people don’t really matter. More often than not, unless they are filthy stinking rich (which is rarely the case), the people who annoy you the most will likely go off to be nothings that fester and vanish into obscurity. Sure there are exceptions, you have your Bill O’ Reilly’s and your Rush Limbaugh’s, but when you realize that they are maybe a few hundred out of the literal hundreds of millions in the US alone it starts to come into perspective.
I’m just curious as to what happened. Is it a side effect of our drive to make people sensitive? I didn’t really start seeing an increase in suicide until schools started picking up their punishment for harassing kids. When I was in Elementary kids could basically do anything short of punching you in the butthole and get away with it, nobody died, sure you had your emotional kids (myself included) but it was hardly a suicide worthy experience.
Perhaps we should take a step back. Stop trying to protect kids from an experience that really shouldn’t be all that much of an experience. It’s not unlike sexuality, we tell people that it is some taboo monstrosity and indeed it is treated like such. Anything you hand over to people stuck in huge concentrations will be compounded as such, so a small reminder that being accepting is important will boom into a ridiculous fear of being judged. The very day I realized how unnecessary it was to be accepted was the very day that my stress levels plummeted straight through the floor. While it was still a bumpy road it was an ever inclining one to the point where I am now.
You may exit school with a few less friends than you were hoping, but you’ll also leave school alive, healthy, and more than likely happy. Plus you’ll find most of your friends have become alcoholics anyways so it really isn’t that big of a loss, or maybe I’m pushing my own experiences on a bit too much there . To summarize, if you are a kid who isn’t feeling quite popular enough, calm the hell down. I played Pokémon from the day it was cool, through the days when it was ‘gay’, and straight on into today. Why? Because I like it, you should do that with anything you enjoy as well. 9 times out of 10 that thing someone is badgering you at school for doing is something they do at their house (this again is something I caught from personal experience).
PS. For those curious, yes I will be finishing up the Mobius code tonight. Just wanted to post this while I was waiting for my next class.