Author: Esther

On Wednesday night, December 5^th, our Macaulay class headed to St. Ann’s Warehouse in Dumbo to see “The Jungle.” Having read several articles and excerpts before the show, I had a vague idea of what to expect. I was aware of what the jungle was and the value of theater and I was excited to see the two play together. However, despite all the reading and classroom discussions, the show was still completely different than I expected.

Missing the first act, I was very upset and quite stressed out. I asked a few other students to fill me in on the show and tried to piece together the different ideas. I had figured out that the refugees had built the jungle and towards the end of the first act the French government arrived. I knew the history from the readings so I was able to catch up on context pretty quick. Yet within the first few moments of the first scene of the second act, I was enthralled. A white girl in a red jacket (who I later learned was named Beth) was talking to a refugee. I was surprised at how kind she was in trying to help as I expected her not to understand. She was trying really hard to understand and their conversation was a striking moment for me. There was a language barrier between them and she struggled to understand his life. No matter which words she chose, they were never the right words and she struggled to communicate with him. When she said “I understand,” he questioned her “You understand how?” I felt the power of his words and I realized, I myself, don’t understand. After constantly stressing to find the right words, she stops and he speaks. I had chills throughout his speech, especially when he considers himself dead; a refugee dies many times. I found that line to be powerful and capture the essence of the entire Jungle in one scene. I found it a rather depressing and unfortunate reality and couldn’t help but think about how blessed we are to live in a country where we are welcomed. The show was very sad as I watched the jungle fall apart. There was a lot of fighting and screaming, cursing and crying, and I was really moved by the emotional impact of the performance.

Diaper Pattern, 1973

In 1973, Martha Rosler created a famous piece of art known as the “Diaper Pattern.” The artwork appears as a simple attachment of many white cloths into a grid. However, these are no ordinary white cloths, they are the diapers of her young son. On each diaper she has written a slogan or a quote relating to the Vietnam war. This art work is not only avant- garde physically, in that no one has spoken out against war through art on their children’s diapers. Rather it is also avant garde in its message. Being a mother in a domestic household, Martha Rosler used her art to challenge the female role in a household. She uses the diapers, which are normally seen around young children, as a way to hold powerful messages about war. This artwork pushes boundaries of art in the way it is designed: a grid of diapers. It also tests the limits of the female role in society and pushes the boundaries of feminism as well.

Martha Rosler uses her son’s diapers as a medium in speaking out against war. Diapers represent the household and domestic life many women spend living. It symbolizes “motherhood” as women are often portrayed as people who stay home and take care of children. By writing violent sayings across diapers, it is no longer just a piece of art work that speaks out against war but also one that speaks out against feminism. The entire work of art is political and encourages controversial discussion. Rosler is bringing the viewer out of their head and forcing them to look at reality; the reality of women and the reality of war. By using diapers to carry her messages, she pushes against the boundaries placed around women, wives, and mothers everywhere.

While Martha Rosler wrote many different messages on the diapers, they all shared a common theme: protesting against the Vietnam War. The word “Gooks” appears over and over on multiple diapers and Martha Rosler is calling attention to this derogatory term and the effects of war. Martha Rosler has placed the diapers in a grid which is ironic since a grid has structure and organization and war is total chaos. The artwork is abstract as it isn’t an obvious mimesis of war or feminism, rather it is a complex composition of ideas. It can be seen as a mimisis of a protest or of war in its violent words and controversial messages, however, the fact that it is organized into a grid contradicts this. I think it is a mimesis of multiple different ideas and not just one idea. Overall, Martha Rosler used her sons diapers as a platform to speak out against war and the traditional domesticity as she brings the two themes together.

This past Wednesday afternoon, I attended Baruch’s Poetry Revel located on the fourteenth floor of the main building. The room was full with Baruch students and a woman stood up and introduced herself as Professor Kelly. She recited two poems and encouraged everyone to come up and share something they wrote. A hand in the back shot up and a girl, rather enthusiastic came up to the front. She was excited to share her poem as she pulled out her phone and began to recite it. It was titled, “Daddy’s Little Girl” and it starts off with her addressing her father. She asks him if he is proud of her and describes all of her accomplishments. As she goes deeper into the poem, her wording shifts and her accomplishments sound like shortcomings. “I only graduated high school” and “I dress like a disgrace.” As an audience member, I was able to notice as she lost all confidence in herself and placed it in her father. She got extremely emotional and had to pause to catch her breath. No one moved and the room was pitch silent. Her voice cracked as she begged for her father’s approval. “Daddy why aren’t you proud of me?” Her words were accompanied by small tears and I felt my heart break. I looked around. Every single person was engrossed in her poem and moved by her performance. Throughout the poem, she put her hand on her neck and/or rubbed the back of her head, both indicators of stress. She moved around a lot as I could tell it was hard for her, not only to read the poem out loud but to accept the poem as words of truth. She ended her poem “I just want you to be there for me… Daddy are you there for me?”

Everyone was shocked from the amount of emotion held in her performance. Her constant nervousness displayed through body language, cracks in her voice, and crying made the poem so powerful. Had I read this poem to myself it would not have been the same experience because it would have lacked all the emotion that came with the writer of the poem. She bowed and everyone was impressed. It took a couple of minutes for Professor Kelly to get someone else to stand up since she set a high bar.

Eventually many students came up and read. Some read poem they wrote for classes, others read famous poems like “The Road Not Taken” by Robert Frost and “If God is Real” by Bri Mar. One boy stood up and read song lyrics that he wrote for his band. The reading was filled with so many different styles and ideas, it kept me on my feet. Since the reading was on Halloween, many students were dressed up as different characters, many unrelated to their poem. I found it ironic to see Superman stand up and read a poem about being in bed with his lover and a rock musician read a poem about hiking up a mountain. I liked that the costumes forced me to look past the individual but at the same time revealed so much about them. One boy was dressed up as a character from a TV show and wrote a poem about this character.

A poem I loved was titled “Initiation” and a young girl started off “I did not think she was dying she just had a small touch of cancer.” I loved how she read it, rushing through the medical parts and slowing down for the emotional parts. When she described the treatment, she sped through and then she paused and her voice slowed down and she spoke about love and then she sped up again as she described the medical treatments and then stop. She took a long break and finally said “In the beginning it was just a diagnosis”. Everyone sat still until Professor Kelly began clapping. Everyone clapped. Her poem was amazing. I loved this poem because of how perfectly she read it. I could tell she had read it before and was an excellent reader. Unlike the reader of “Daddy’s Little Girl,” she didn’t put so much emotion into it. I felt as though she had stepped out of the picture and read it from a more “removed” place. She had practiced reading it and her emotions weren’t as raw. I liked the professionalism but at the same time I missed the emotional aspect as well.

I enjoyed attending a poetry reading at Baruch because it was filled with a diverse variety of students just like me all reciting their poems. The environment was warm and each poem was a masterpiece within itself. I stayed for approximately fifty minutes and I really enjoyed myself. I plan on returning, hopefully next time as a reader.

Garry Winograd was a New York based photographer who lived during the mid 1900s. Most of his work is New York street photography, snapshots of people in their everyday lives. Scrolling through pictures on google, I immediately stopped at this picture. Something about it struck me. I was immediately enthralled from what appeared to be an ordinary photograph.

The picture is titled “Radio City” and it was taken in the year 1961. The studium is a woman standing outside Radio City Music Hall Rockefeller Center with a bag by her feet. A man seems to be walking towards her and she is staring at him. But staring at the picture, I wanted to know more. Something about the picture captivated my attention and arouse a certain curiosity in me. What was that something? What was the punctum? Was it the cigarette in the woman’s hand? The sign next to her? The hand behind her back? Maybe. The more I allowed the photograph to consume me, the more I realized that the punctum was not in the picture, yet it was the entire picture.

To me, the punctum was the angle in which the photograph was taken. The picture was not taken from a traditional viewpoint. The photographer was crouched down on the floor and standing on the right side. Staring at this image, I understand what Barthes means when he says the punctum is a call for action. I feel a certain level of discomfort and I am overcome with a desire to step into the picture and straighten everything out. I can’t help but wonder why the photographer chose that angle. The building looks slanted as though it is sliding down the sidewalk, and everything on the left side of the picture is “higher” than the right side. The fact that the picture is taken from such an angle changes my entire perception of the image. The slanted angle highlights the man and he appears larger than the woman. Standing on the left side and having the picture taken from the bottom right, the man seems to be walking “over” her as though he is on top and more dominant. I can’t help but wonder if Winograd intended for the photo took like this; I want to say that he didn’t but then why did he angle the picture?

       Located in the Fine Art Gallery on Coney Island is a small framed painting. This piece of artwork was not only located on a shelf but with many paintings but had many paintings hanging above and below it as well. The gallery was nothing like I’d imagined, completely filled with paintings, it was hard to focus on a painting as whole. Unlike my experience in the MOMA where the art was spread out, The Fine Art Gallery of Coney Island was overflowing with artwork and didn’t have much empty white space behind it.  

       The artwork is composed of the three primary colors, highlighting the simplicity of the piece.The left side is red, the middle is yellow, and the right is blue. All three of these colors are a light shade: light red, light yellow, and light blue. The colors all sort of blend together, creating a light orange and grey background. There is small moon in the top center. The bottom of the painting appears to be green, it looks like a floor and there is a couple skating through the center of the artwork (the yellow) which appears to be a doorway. One the left side, there is a figure which appears as a woman. Though it is just a lightly painted body, she appears to have a breast. She is painted with pinks and yellows which blend into a greyish purple as yell. She is roller skating, one foot in front of the other. Her skates are a peachy light pink and her hand extends to the center of the painting holding hands with another figure on the other side of the painting. This figure is painted of a variety of shades of blue. Unlike the woman on roller skates, this figure is on a bicycle. The two figures represent two separate ideas, the figure on the left is painted with warm colors and the figure on the right is painted with cool colors. The left side which is a reddish orange contrasts with the bluish green on the other side as the artists chose complimentary colors to draw this couple.Though the two sides of the painting are very much different, the artist chooses the yellow space in the middle to he symbolize unity and the joining of the two hands. There is very simple landscape without much detail evoking a feeling of peace and serenity.

      Growing up in Brooklyn, I have longed for trips to the small Carvel located on Coney Island and Avenue V. The wide selection would make my mouth water as I would hop between “Rocky Road Crunch’ to “Blueberry Pie.” Every trip to carvel was a different experience and I never got the same thing twice, no matter how delicious. What made the experience so amazing was the parking lot where I would eat my ice cream. The parking lot is filled with people sitting, I can hardly get a table. People are walking in and out holding huge cones of ice cream, each one with two or three scoops. A couple sits to my left sharing an oreo milkshake. A family sits behind us opening a package of flying saucers, “I called the chocolate sprinkles!” a little boy shouts at his sister. Everyone is smiling.  

      Spray painted across the wall of carvel is what I like to think of as a candy land. The scenery of the painting is the bright blue sky , the shade of blue getting lighter as it goes down the painting. The bottom of the wall is spray-painted with clouds and amidst the clouds are ice cream scoops. The clouds are as white as snow and outlined in a light blue. Starting from the left is a large yellow scoop of ice cream perhaps French Vanilla or Cake Batter; the rounded top of the scoop is covered lightly in faded sprinkles and cherry dip on top. The dip is bright red and has drips going down the scoop. Slightly behind it is a light orange scoop of ice cream which appears to be creamsicle or butter pecan. The top of it is covered in chocolate fudge and though the ice cream scoop is slanted, a cherry is placed perfectly on top. To the right of it is a light pink scoop, clearly strawberry and it has chocolate sprinkles splattered on it. The three scoops appear to be floating amongst the clouds as if one could just jump over them. Behind the ice cream scoops are two large ice cream cones. One is a waffle cone filled with vanilla and chocolate twist. The top of the cone is covered in chocolate fudge with nuts. The cone appears to be leaning against another cone, this one is filled with plain vanilla ice cream and covered in rainbow sprinkles. Behind the cones are three flying oreos! Flying oreos!

      The background of the artwork contains a variety of different ice cream scoops. The light colors of the ice cream (orange and pink) blend into the background creating a peaceful sunset. Located in the center of the art is a flowing chocolate river, painted dark brown with streaks of black that appear like waves. There are small cherries and white swirls which appear to be whipped cream floating across the river. Over the chocolate fudge river is a round semi- circle bridge made out of a waffle cone. It is light brown with a dark brown outline. It caves over the river as a though it is a walkway.

       The right half is filled with more ice cream cones. In the front is a cone filled with strawberry and french vanilla twist. Along the back is a row of coes, all upside down. They are large waffle cones painted light brown with a beige grid. Each one appears to have the large part of the cone dipped in a different type of chocolate. The first is covered in a rich dark chocolate with small beige nuts. The second is also a dark chocolate but this one has sprinkles which are made out of small black lines. The third has a colorful sprinkle and the fourth has a faded light brown sprinkle. In the bottom right corner are another three scoops, again chocolate light pink, and light orange respectively.  On the right side of the artwork is a flying ice cream cone filled with vanilla ice cream and two white angel wings coming out, one from each side. The cone is once again light brown and has a golden sash floating in front of it, saying,

”Don’t tell me. Show me.

Forever in our hearts”

      I have never noticed this before as the artwork appears to be painted in memory of a group of people. On top of the artwork are three floating cherries. They are round and appear to be flying, they have wings coming out and each one has a different name spray painted inside of it. I think this art can be the artists view of the after life as he/she hopes the three people who passed are in a better place. He/she envisions a world of no evil, no harm, no stress just the happy feeling one gets from ice cream.

       By having this artwork outside an ice cream store, it enhances the experience one has while eating his/her ice cream. The painting feeds off of the viewers imagination, creating a world that is filled with ice cream and chocolate. It removes any worries one may have about health or weight since it portrays ice cream in such a friendly and pleasant environment. The wall is designed using only light and friendly colors, welcoming. Anyone who sees this art will immediately want to indulge in their ice cream as it appears to welcome one into this world, above the heavens, a world of happiness, pleasure, and ice cream.

“The Dream” was painted by French artist Henri Rousseau. This painting, along with many others, was painted during his last year of life; 1910. Rousseau loved painting jungles even though he never physically left his home in France. This painting can be found on the fifth floor of the Museum of Modern Art in New York City where it was donated in 1954 by Nelson A. Rockefeller. The  painting’s dimensions are 6’ 8” by 9’ 9” and it is made from oil on canvas.

On the left side of the painting lies a naked woman on an ordinary sofa. She has her arm out as though she is reaching out towards something. Surrounding her is a jungle filled with exotic plants, fruits, and animals and it seems as though the woman on the sofa does not belong there. While there is a lot going on in the painting, the two lions immediately grab the viewers’ attention. They are painted with light colors as opposed to the dark colors used to depict the person behind them. The lions are relatively small and don’t appear to be so scary. One lion is staring directly at the viewer and looks rather afraid. His eyes are big and his head is slightly lower than his back, revealing his mane. The top of his back pokes through the high grass and his body is directed towards the woman but his head is turned to face the viewer. While lions are often used to represent dominance, this lion appears to be lost, worried or scared. The other lion has no mane- she is a lioness and she is staring at the woman. The artist chooses not to paint their entire bodies, rather just their heads sticking out through the plants, focusing on their facial expressions. Rousseau is able to convey feelings of fear, distress and entrapment using lions.