GORKY

This movie is one that I was surprised I had never heard of before. What I immediately wondered was why they didn't make the movie within the film. It seems the purpose of the film was to convey they disgusting events that occurred to provoke a desired response. Since there were 3 different stories going on outside the film about the genocide, it felt as if they led the viewer off track. I realize they all tie in well, and I did enjoy the story, but the most powerful images and messages all come from the genocide. I had only heard of Gorky before, not knowing his work or the story behind it, but he seems like a depressing character. Living through the what he did in Turkey (though I don't know if they just tied him in to their film, regardless of fact), but between the genocide and his suicide the only happy moment in his life seemed to be the 30 seconds of dancing he did in his studio. What I can't stand is how Turkey can deny something like this ever happened. As horrific as these events were, I can see no downfall to admitting they occurred. One part of the movie that was basically the critical point in making it a good film or an okay one is when the old customs agent let the main character go. He found the drugs, but since the main character did not believe he was capable of being a smuggler he was released. I'm not sure exactly why I like this scene beside the fact that I believed that he didn't intentionally bring in the drugs. Maybe I am attracted to the idea that what you think you're capable of is inaccurate. The key to maintaining your capabilities is through ignorance.

Body and Archive

Though exceedingly lengthy, there are some interesting points made in this article. The whole science or pseudo-science of phrenology has always been an interesting topic to me. The idea that a person's physical characteristics can determine their tendency towards crime is intriguing. There is an obvious connection to the Nazis and some of their practices to find perfect Aryans and their tendency to declare somebody Jewish or otherwise by physical characteristics alone. Each race can be generalized by some common characteristics, which I do not believe to be stereotyping, but assuming them to have a certain personality trait based on physical attributes is a stereotype. On page 363?, there is a Bertillon Card with the picture of a man and various measurements of his features: nose, chin, ear, etc. The odd thing is his name is no where on the card. His characteristics not only identify him, but have become his identity. I am interested in having myself subjected to the science of phrenology to see exactly what my tendencies should be (I have a feeling I'm destined for greatness). One thing that this made me consider was since children's characteristics will change as they grow older, I wondered if people ever attempted to change their physical attributes, maybe creating some primitive form of plastic surgery...probably not.

stock photos

Being an advertising major, i have to dive into the stock photography pool fairly often. And looking at the photos from different sites, there is a very large amount of similar photos. Though they may not be exactly the same, they are usually interchangable. It is interesting how this reading notes how stock photography was looked down upon by the photography industry. Every time I use a stock photo, i feel as if i am just coping out because i know that image has probably been used a hundred times before. I can respect photos that are considered stock photos and below true art because advertising works much in the same fashion. Most of the work done for advertising, though it may be beautiful and wonderfully creative, is considered below art by most of those who are labeled as artists. Andy Warhol was originally in advertising and made the move to "high art" though his cambells soup can is basically a stock photo now.
Another interesting subject brought up was that of the album covers. most of the time they really don't have to do with the band and are just random. But they call it album art for a reason. That photo of K-Klass's album seems really pathetic to me and im not surprised i've never heard of them.
Whats also interesting is how a single photo can become somewhat of an icon and it will be used for hundreds of different purposes and have hundreds of meanings (meshing gears or the water drop).