I have an English Class in 10 hours, and wrote this 1.5 page paper. Was wondering if anyone could take a quick glance at it for SIGNIFICANT errors. I don't want to bother anyone by asking to make sure the t's are crossed and the i's are dotted. Just a quick read and if anything is WAY off, please let me know you're take on it. I won't have a lot of time for editing after I read your comments as I am just simply waking up, reading your replys, spending 5 minutes correcting (I have re-read this a few times but personally see nothing wrong with it, except I am an english fearing person).. and i guess just then heading off to college..
This paper's about some essay we read. The 'facts' and whatnot do not need to be known in order to correct the essay, just a simple "This sentence makes no sence" type thing.. Anyways, thanks for all the help!!!
--------- Some of John Berger?s ideas hold true through the test of time. Idea?s ranging from love, all the way to the depiction between higher and lower classes. Some ideal?s however, change (by interpretation) through the course of time. Society has never been more eager to repeat itself; from market value, all the way to the bandwagon appeal held by royalty. Freedom to express one self has changed as well, from paintings on buildings to thousands of replica?s covering the walls of the very same building, hundreds of years later. The knowledge one?s own people share has also changed, yet in some aspects, stayed the same. From the poorer countries lacking the education to appreciate such paintings, to the rich who want to get their hands on the most expensive piece of artwork there is.
===================
"Ways of Seeing" -- John Berger
--------- Lets begin with how today?s society has never been more eager to repeat itself. Consider this, hundreds of years ago, the Egyptians would hang nothing but royal paintings in their homes to remind them who their Leader(s) were. Today, the president and his constituents are in every home?s television set in the United States displaying their royal like nature. The Egyptians would work and mine for gold to give to their masters, and at the time, weren?t paid for their efforts. The royal leaders would then take these riches and in exchange, have more paintings drawn for them to spread their influential power. Today, every single individual (especially in free countries) are at war with each other. Each and every person is trying to ?spread their influential power?, and one way to do that is to be the one person to say ?I own the Michael Angelo statue? which tells the onlooker that this person has got to be wealthy in order to own something such as this. This brings me to my next point, the painting no longer has any historical value, it is merely a work worth a certain amount of money.
--------- So where has freedom of expression gone? Today, people are ordered to create ?art? through corporations, by paying these artists to do so, leaving them only a small window to express themselves. The rest of the work these artists do is directed by the company that wants it done their way. As this ties back into how society repeats itself, money is driving (especially American) people. The monetary system has been abused to which you have to abuse it in order to survive. This (I believe) is a chokepoint for today?s artists. Only a few artists can truly express themselves. For example, in a residential (poorer) neighborhood you may spot graffiti, or a mural on a wall of the side of a building. Has it really come to the drastic point where we are forced to break the law and ruin someone else?s property to properly express ourselves? It?s almost impossible for a truly inspirational artist to succeed without working under the wing of a large, well-known person or company. This is why I believe that freedom of expression has changed through time, to the point where there almost is no more freedom anymore.
--------- Ironically, and interestingly enough, the point I made earlier about graffiti in poorer neighborhoods completely contradicts Mr. Berger?s statement (Page 147) ??an interest in art is related to privileged education?. This is one of the few things I would argue with Mr. Berger. True, the uneducated majority does not attend art museums but they do not need to actually go to the museums to express their creativity and openly express their mind through art. They simply need a place where they can concentrate and feel as if they are ?leaving their mark? sort of speak in their place in society. Of course, this is done illegally and put on commercial and residential buildings without the owners consent. The thrill over breaking society?s rules to display one?s thought on society through art, is something very interesting.
--------- I believe, in some sort of way, everyone is an artist, whether they paint, sketch, sing, play an instrument, or feel free to express themselves in a way that no one else can. I express myself through music, playing the drums in my band. As Rush?s bass player Geddy Lee say?s it best, ?through the advances in technology and modern machinery, music is still the open hearted.? (Permanent Waves: Spirit of Radio). Art could cover many different spectrums, and when there?s even the slightest chance of profitability, the average person will fight for it to try and attain themselves to a higher level in this hierarchy of modern society. As in Egyptian times, this would be the same, only however applying to the Royal families. Today, everyone has the chance to try and attain a higher level in society, and they at each others neck?s trying to get there. However, the financially privileged are making things harder for these people because the value of such paintings from, say, Leonardo da Vinci?s Market value will continue to rise until only very few can afford for such a piece of art. I fear that in the future, the devoutness to create more original pieces of art will start to talk, but no one will listen. I fear that the creativity in all aspects of art will start to diminish as the monetary system becomes more demanding. Unless something is done, the rich will steer the future, the meanings behind art will be lost, only those that are financially privileged will be allowed to listen to the art of music, the law?s will be even more specific and penalizing. Allow art to be open and creative and not restricted, through ether law or increases in market value. This is all based around the words describing the painting. Words can be changed, distorted, in one perspective and not another, and may give the wrong impression. One?s own experience witnessing art will be different than the person standing next to them. Throwing words at a piece of art will distort the work?s true story and through time, change its true meaning.
===================
Once again, thanks for your time. Now I am not asking you to "do the work for me", any tips, suggestions, examples, would help me. I just hate English, but don't want to half-ass college. We had 1 day to do the assignment so it isn't like I put it off (too far lol).. turns out I woke up in the middle of the night (USA. CST) and remembered that this was due tomarrow morning. I spent some time writing and came up with this piece of crap lol. Anyways, all help is appreciated. Thanks!!
This paper's about some essay we read. The 'facts' and whatnot do not need to be known in order to correct the essay, just a simple "This sentence makes no sence" type thing.. Anyways, thanks for all the help!!!
--------- Some of John Berger?s ideas hold true through the test of time. Idea?s ranging from love, all the way to the depiction between higher and lower classes. Some ideal?s however, change (by interpretation) through the course of time. Society has never been more eager to repeat itself; from market value, all the way to the bandwagon appeal held by royalty. Freedom to express one self has changed as well, from paintings on buildings to thousands of replica?s covering the walls of the very same building, hundreds of years later. The knowledge one?s own people share has also changed, yet in some aspects, stayed the same. From the poorer countries lacking the education to appreciate such paintings, to the rich who want to get their hands on the most expensive piece of artwork there is.
===================
"Ways of Seeing" -- John Berger
--------- Lets begin with how today?s society has never been more eager to repeat itself. Consider this, hundreds of years ago, the Egyptians would hang nothing but royal paintings in their homes to remind them who their Leader(s) were. Today, the president and his constituents are in every home?s television set in the United States displaying their royal like nature. The Egyptians would work and mine for gold to give to their masters, and at the time, weren?t paid for their efforts. The royal leaders would then take these riches and in exchange, have more paintings drawn for them to spread their influential power. Today, every single individual (especially in free countries) are at war with each other. Each and every person is trying to ?spread their influential power?, and one way to do that is to be the one person to say ?I own the Michael Angelo statue? which tells the onlooker that this person has got to be wealthy in order to own something such as this. This brings me to my next point, the painting no longer has any historical value, it is merely a work worth a certain amount of money.
--------- So where has freedom of expression gone? Today, people are ordered to create ?art? through corporations, by paying these artists to do so, leaving them only a small window to express themselves. The rest of the work these artists do is directed by the company that wants it done their way. As this ties back into how society repeats itself, money is driving (especially American) people. The monetary system has been abused to which you have to abuse it in order to survive. This (I believe) is a chokepoint for today?s artists. Only a few artists can truly express themselves. For example, in a residential (poorer) neighborhood you may spot graffiti, or a mural on a wall of the side of a building. Has it really come to the drastic point where we are forced to break the law and ruin someone else?s property to properly express ourselves? It?s almost impossible for a truly inspirational artist to succeed without working under the wing of a large, well-known person or company. This is why I believe that freedom of expression has changed through time, to the point where there almost is no more freedom anymore.
--------- Ironically, and interestingly enough, the point I made earlier about graffiti in poorer neighborhoods completely contradicts Mr. Berger?s statement (Page 147) ??an interest in art is related to privileged education?. This is one of the few things I would argue with Mr. Berger. True, the uneducated majority does not attend art museums but they do not need to actually go to the museums to express their creativity and openly express their mind through art. They simply need a place where they can concentrate and feel as if they are ?leaving their mark? sort of speak in their place in society. Of course, this is done illegally and put on commercial and residential buildings without the owners consent. The thrill over breaking society?s rules to display one?s thought on society through art, is something very interesting.
--------- I believe, in some sort of way, everyone is an artist, whether they paint, sketch, sing, play an instrument, or feel free to express themselves in a way that no one else can. I express myself through music, playing the drums in my band. As Rush?s bass player Geddy Lee say?s it best, ?through the advances in technology and modern machinery, music is still the open hearted.? (Permanent Waves: Spirit of Radio). Art could cover many different spectrums, and when there?s even the slightest chance of profitability, the average person will fight for it to try and attain themselves to a higher level in this hierarchy of modern society. As in Egyptian times, this would be the same, only however applying to the Royal families. Today, everyone has the chance to try and attain a higher level in society, and they at each others neck?s trying to get there. However, the financially privileged are making things harder for these people because the value of such paintings from, say, Leonardo da Vinci?s Market value will continue to rise until only very few can afford for such a piece of art. I fear that in the future, the devoutness to create more original pieces of art will start to talk, but no one will listen. I fear that the creativity in all aspects of art will start to diminish as the monetary system becomes more demanding. Unless something is done, the rich will steer the future, the meanings behind art will be lost, only those that are financially privileged will be allowed to listen to the art of music, the law?s will be even more specific and penalizing. Allow art to be open and creative and not restricted, through ether law or increases in market value. This is all based around the words describing the painting. Words can be changed, distorted, in one perspective and not another, and may give the wrong impression. One?s own experience witnessing art will be different than the person standing next to them. Throwing words at a piece of art will distort the work?s true story and through time, change its true meaning.
===================
Once again, thanks for your time. Now I am not asking you to "do the work for me", any tips, suggestions, examples, would help me. I just hate English, but don't want to half-ass college. We had 1 day to do the assignment so it isn't like I put it off (too far lol).. turns out I woke up in the middle of the night (USA. CST) and remembered that this was due tomarrow morning. I spent some time writing and came up with this piece of crap lol. Anyways, all help is appreciated. Thanks!!
Facebook
Twitter