My image was transmitted through representational (drawing) and mechanical (internet) methods. By using a rendering style of pen and ink I created an unfinished idea sort of like a coloring book, which decreased the amount of noise that could have misinterpreted my message (color, area, usage, etc.). Although noise can relate too the receivers cultural background, and in this case she responded to the rickety bench by saying "...and in my experiences , it always seems like a bench like this isn't to far from the sketchiest part of town...". In this second postcard I received context and more products that will help me to define a system. The interpretation of my postcard was successful in its intended message, which is the idea of many bench's being connotative of many certain areas. The idea of "structure" in a bench and how that alone can communicate an idea about certain social classes and areas is intriguing.
The analogy of all of the benches existing in a vacuum is an interesting thought. The idea of all of these types of benches existing in the environment (the vacuum) but they are connotative of different parts (parts that make up the vacuum) of town seems to comment on different social classes existing in different parts of town. For example we are associating the rickety old bench with a sketchy part of town, could we then say that we would be able to associate a certain type of individual with this scene as well? I believe that this could work for all the these juxtapositions. The ornate bench, according to the response, is associated with a well-established "town center" or "apartment complex". Would it be appropriate again to say that the person we would assume to see here would be the aristocrat or a wealthy individual?
I also thought that it was interesting that more space is taken up by the ornate bench composition, which is revealing that the the more aristocratic social class hierarchically is above the working class (the rickety bench). The ratio of size also reveals the amount of money associated with each class, typically the aristocratic class is more involved with charity since they have more wealth. The working class is usually receiving the wealth from the aristocrats in order to make a living, in essence the rickety bench manages through life through the success of the ornate bench.
This is a formula for how I am observing this dialectic...
We have a bench We have a certain place that we associate with this bench. We have a social class now associated with this place. We have a social class that can affect two larger systems, which are social and economic.
Therefore benches in there essence of form can reveal connotations for a certain social class, which affects the economic and social systems.
I totally agree. You've read my mind. I was hinting at the fact that different bench structures can connote different social classes and areas of an environment. I just didn't want to come outright and tell you that. I wanted to see if we both could reach the same end result with the sketches you presented. I had a feeling that you had purposefully sketched the benches in pen and ink, so that they could be open for interpretation, which helped lead us to our final conclusion: Here is a bench. This bench belongs to a place in society. A certain social class will occupy this bench. The area in which the bench is located, and the users of the bench will ultimately drive the design and structure of the bench. Form follows function.
The conversation that we have had has been successful in conveying a clear message, yay! To your question "Why is the proletariat larger than the bourgeoisie?"...I did that to throw the viewer off in order to reveal that in Marx's philosophy he tells us that the working class will always rebel. I interpret this as the working class inevitably becoming the dominant class due to power in numbers (the working class is usually larger). In a sense they (proletariat and bourgeoisie) will switch places, it's only a matter of time.
It's been fun having this conversation with you! If you ever need anything for a project, maybe a different point of view from someone that is in another state, then I'm your person!
My response:
ReplyDeleteMy image was transmitted through representational (drawing) and mechanical (internet) methods. By using a rendering style of pen and ink I created an unfinished idea sort of like a coloring book, which decreased the amount of noise that could have misinterpreted my message (color, area, usage, etc.). Although noise can relate too the receivers cultural background, and in this case she responded to the rickety bench by saying "...and in my experiences , it always seems like a bench like this isn't to far from the sketchiest part of town...". In this second postcard I received context and more products that will help me to define a system. The interpretation of my postcard was successful in its intended message, which is the idea of many bench's being connotative of many certain areas. The idea of "structure" in a bench and how that alone can communicate an idea about certain social classes and areas is intriguing.
The analogy of all of the benches existing in a vacuum is an interesting thought. The idea of all of these types of benches existing in the environment (the vacuum) but they are connotative of different parts (parts that make up the vacuum) of town seems to comment on different social classes existing in different parts of town. For example we are associating the rickety old bench with a sketchy part of town, could we then say that we would be able to associate a certain type of individual with this scene as well? I believe that this could work for all the these juxtapositions. The ornate bench, according to the response, is associated with a well-established "town center" or "apartment complex". Would it be appropriate again to say that the person we would assume to see here would be the aristocrat or a wealthy individual?
I also thought that it was interesting that more space is taken up by the ornate bench composition, which is revealing that the the more aristocratic social class hierarchically is above the working class (the rickety bench). The ratio of size also reveals the amount of money associated with each class, typically the aristocratic class is more involved with charity since they have more wealth. The working class is usually receiving the wealth from the aristocrats in order to make a living, in essence the rickety bench manages through life through the success of the ornate bench.
This is a formula for how I am observing this dialectic...
We have a bench
We have a certain place that we associate with this bench.
We have a social class now associated with this place.
We have a social class that can affect two larger systems, which are social and economic.
Therefore benches in there essence of form can reveal connotations for a certain social class, which affects the economic and social systems.
I totally agree. You've read my mind.
ReplyDeleteI was hinting at the fact that different bench structures can connote different social classes and areas of an environment. I just didn't want to come outright and tell you that. I wanted to see if we both could reach the same end result with the sketches you presented.
I had a feeling that you had purposefully sketched the benches in pen and ink, so that they could be open for interpretation, which helped lead us to our final conclusion:
Here is a bench.
This bench belongs to a place in society.
A certain social class will occupy this bench.
The area in which the bench is located, and the users of the bench will ultimately drive the design and structure of the bench.
Form follows function.
The conversation that we have had has been successful in conveying a clear message, yay! To your question "Why is the proletariat larger than the bourgeoisie?"...I did that to throw the viewer off in order to reveal that in Marx's philosophy he tells us that the working class will always rebel. I interpret this as the working class inevitably becoming the dominant class due to power in numbers (the working class is usually larger). In a sense they (proletariat and bourgeoisie) will switch places, it's only a matter of time.
ReplyDeleteIt's been fun having this conversation with you! If you ever need anything for a project, maybe a different point of view from someone that is in another state, then I'm your person!