Blog Post 1

Part 1- Articles

  1. One of the main points of “What Entrepreneurs Can Learn from Artists is that artists have more in common than one would probably think, as the two are becoming more and more integrated with each other. Another point is that while artists do not always get the recognition and reverence that they deserve, they have attributes that are critically valuable in any line of work, including entrepreneurism, as well as in life. The while “Are Artists Entrepreneurs?” also cites the similarities of artists and entrepreneurs and what is admirable in both, it asserts what they need to work on. They must not ignore, but face and work with the unpleasant realities of life in a way that would only improve and advance themselves.
  2. Artists can learn to create a ‘support system,’ so to speak, as several entrepreneurs do. It is not uncommon for there to be a period one can point to in the lives of famous artists of depression brought from loneliness and/or isolation. Entrepreneurs prove that that that does not need to be the case- you can and should accept help along the way and take others along for the journey.
  3. I have to agree that artists are entrepreneurs. Before these articles, I would have never thought that there would be anything in common with the two, but one could not argue with the solid points explained. Things like they both share passion and a vision and at times have to play to the crowd to a degree made me have a paradigm shift.
  4. All of the twelve ring true to me, but the one I resonated with the most is that artists are like children. Like rock stars, artists never seem to get old. I have seen several people that had such a presence that I was not surprised at all when I found out that they were artists. They just have this glow, even if they have grey hair and faces layered with wrinkles.
  5. I would add to the list that artists are sensitive. Not all, but many artists take any criticism, even constructive criticism, very personally. They are also easily moved by the emotions of others. But because of this sensitivity, they are also typically die-hard romantics.
  6. I loved both articles. I thought that both had several specific insights, backed by logic. They changed my view on entrepreneurism. Instead of viewing them with skepticism, I see and understand their qualities enough to appreciate them. As an artist, I see that there we have more in common than I previously thought. When a work changes the way anyone thinks or feels about anything, it is successful.

Part 2- TED talk

  1. I can feel somewhat certain that I have grit. Whether or not the world is seeing results, I am very ambitious and have a fierce determination. I have several long-term goals.
  2. I could overcome anxiety and OCD. The reason this would help me to increase my grit is because those disorders take so much emotional and mental energy that almost everything else in my life falls second on terms of my focus. Do not get me wrong, I can nearly physically feel inside of me the strength and passion and the willingness to endure and work hard, but it is, at the moment buried under the stress of merely functioning with the speed and ability of a regular human being. Perhaps I should put my focus on overcoming my mental disorders, rather than on my long-term goals. At least at first. Perhaps I need to have grit about overcoming what is cutting off my access to the innate grit.

South Congress Adventure in Photography

southcongressstar southcongressplantasuars southcongresspianoblue southcongresspianoconverse southcongressdominos southcongresschandelier southcongresslightbulbandboxes southcongresschandelier

A common theme that arose in my photos was light. Light in the form of light bulbs, chandeliers, glare, sparkle, reflection, you name it. I also tried to go for interesting angles, so instead of merely being in front of the object, I took a random shot at an odd angle to see how it would come out. I think I’m attracted to light because it symbolically symbolizes innocence, purity, positivity, spirituality, enlightenment, energy, all of which are personal values of mine. I chose to experiment with random angles, because I love the element of playfulness it brings. I would say I am a playful, experimental person. I like to look at things in an unconventional way. See what others may not. My favorite seven-not all, but most of them- contain one or both of these things. I have no real significance of the ones I had chosen; I just chose the ones that jumped out at me, the ones that made me “light up” instantly (pun very intended).

Amy Tan’s “Where does Creativity Hide?” TED Talk Essay/ “A Whole New Mind” Essay

TED talks have always fascinated, inspired, and stimulated me intellectually on a personal level. That being said, I came into Amy Tan’s TED talk titled “Where does creativity hide?” with an open mind. However, as Tan’s talk progressed, I developed a gut feeling that I could not shake off. It was only at the end of the second viewing that I accepted that this was the only TED talk to disappoint me to date. This is saying something given that it is about a subject near and dear to my heart: creativity. What disturbs me about this TED talk (and to be honest, what gave me a head ache) was irrelevant material and an unsettling lack of focus.

Tan opens her talk with acknowledging that she has a limited amount of time in which to present her information and yet she wastes some of the time she just emphasized the value of on what she calls the “TED Commandments.” This piece of information is not relevant to her point, which is to explore where creativity comes from; its only purpose is for laughs, and it is placed in the worst possible place in her speech: in the beginning. To me, if one insists on including jokes, that is fine- comic relief is a healthy break for the viewer or reader in perhaps a more complex subject. However, jokes should be relevant to the subject being discussed, or else should be placed at the end if one has already covered the core points and if time permits. Because of this, she did not create a foundation of focus in her beginning. Her Parameters of Discussion theory was also irrelevant. It was interesting but not truly needed, and perhaps would have been perfectly fine if she had let us say an hour long allotment, which she did not. The dog that emerges from her bag was admittedly a surprising (and let us admit it, cute) conclusion, but the point was unclear. Was it to be spontaneous? Was it to show that creativity can come out of the most unlikely of places? It does not matter so much what was the intended purpose as to the fact that the purpose is unclear to the viewer.

Tan’s delivery is for the most part mono-tone. Her sentences are hard to distinguish from each other. If her speech was an essay, it would be nothing but comma splices. If it is possible, I can hear her comma splices. The ending of her sentences are merely the beginning of the following ones. Her speaking in this way, combined with the speed with which she spoke, leaves the viewer feeling they need to make a conscious effort to keep up with her. Perhaps if she had less material, she would not have felt the need to rush her words as much or jump from topic to topic so as to fit it all in her time allotment. I would have cut the information to be covered in half. While she did have some profound and thought provoking points, the viewer did not have time to fully comprehend and internalize an idea, because she was already on the next point. Her TED talk was convoluted and at times cryptic. There were some sentences that I was not sure if they were meant to be jokes or profound. For example, when she is explaining her unnecessary Parameters of Discussion theory, she utters “…my left brain and my right brain and the one that’s in between tells me that what I’m saying is wrong.” Wrong? Wrong about what exactly? Also, she had what I thought to be ineffective transitions. For instance, the slides titled “genocide” and “torture” are not accurate and perhaps a little misleading, because she does not talk specifically about those two subjects and whether or not there are mean to be some clever metaphor is not even apparent.

Overall, Amy Tan’s TED talk was all over the place and long-winded. While she had some profound points, she simply had too much material, which caused a lack of focus.

 

Daniel H. Pink wastes no time in his book “A Whole New Mind” with the gripping opening line “Think of the last 150 years as a three-act drama.” He then proceeds to expand on this vivid metaphor, naming Act I “the Industrial Age”, Act II, “the Information age,” and Act III, “the Conceptual age.” That striking first line was the beginning of a read that was both enjoyable and effective, which radically changed the way I view the mind, the political atmosphere in which I live, and essentially the world and my role as an artist in it.

It has eloquent and beautiful language. It describes “high concept” as “the ability to create artistic and emotional beauty,” and “high touch” as the ability “to find joy in one’s self and to elicit it in others.” It has exciting diction with words like “momentum,” “new,” “powerful,” and “progress.” “The curtain rising on Act III (or the Conceptual Age)” both illustrates the notion that it is in the process of becoming and evokes a sense of excitement and suspense for the era. It is thought-provoking with lines such as “If a picture is worth a thousand words, a metaphor is worth a thousand pictures.” It has an enthusiastic, impassioned tone which comes in the form of italics and repetition. Pink surely displays the playfulness of a creative what with nicknaming computer programmers “Information Age Rockstars” and inventing the idea of “Concept Nation.”

Do not let all this flowery language fool you. He is not without reason and logic; he backs up his grand statements. What many would see as a far-fetched claim that the world is headed for the arts and the products of R- Directed thinking, he backs up with not one, not two, but three solid supporting examples: American medical schools, Japanese curriculum, General Motors. Even though he himself is identifying with the more artsy industry, he is still objective in that he acknowledges the need for the other half, or “L-Directed thinkers,” thus creating the concept of a “whole mind” or a balance of both hemispheres of the brain. Thoughts were organized very well under subtitles that were both creative and accurate. It even has effective syntax in that, because of its variety, makes reading and the progression of ideas a comfortable flow.

This passage was a good, profound read full of rich metaphors and astonishing evidence, persuasive in every way of its assertion that R-directed thinking will be more in demand in the future. It got me quite enthusiastic about my personal future as someone who is going into the arts, because it looks like, according to the excerpt, by the time I enter the work force, I will be more respected and more in demand. It renewed my passion to see more art in the world.

A Whole New Mind Essay

Daniel H. Pink wastes no time in his book “A Whole New Mind” with the gripping opening line “Think of the last 150 years as a three-act drama.” He then proceeds to expand on this vivid metaphor, naming Act I “the Industrial Age”, Act II, “the Information age,” and Act III, “the Conceptual age.” That striking first line was the beginning of a read that was both enjoyable and effective, which radically changed the way I view the mind, the political atmosphere in which I live, and essentially the world and my role as an artist in it.

It has eloquent and beautiful language. It describes “high concept” as “the ability to create artistic and emotional beauty,” and “high touch” as the ability “to find joy in one’s self and to elicit it in others.” It has exciting diction with words like “momentum,” “new,” “powerful,” and “progress.” “The curtain rising on Act III (or the Conceptual Age)” both illustrates the notion that it is in the process of becoming and evokes a sense of excitement and suspense for the era. It is thought-provoking with lines such as “If a picture is worth a thousand words, a metaphor is worth a thousand pictures.” It has an enthusiastic, impassioned tone which comes in the form of italics and repetition. Pink surely displays the playfulness of a creative what with nicknaming computer programmers “Information Age Rockstars” and inventing the idea of “Concept Nation.”

Do not let all this flowery language fool you. He is not without reason and logic; he backs up his grand statements. What many would see as a far-fetched claim that the world is headed for the arts and the products of R- Directed thinking, he backs up with not one, not two, but three solid supporting examples: American medical schools, Japanese curriculum, General Motors. Even though he himself is identifying with the more artsy industry, he is still objective in that he acknowledges the need for the other half, or “L-Directed thinkers,” thus creating the concept of a “whole mind” or a balance of both hemispheres of the brain. Thoughts were organized very well under subtitles that were both creative and accurate. It even has effective syntax in that, because of its variety, makes reading and the progression of ideas a comfortable flow.

This passage was a good, profound read full of rich metaphors and astonishing evidence, persuasive in every way of its assertion that R-directed thinking will be more in demand in the future. It got me quite enthusiastic about my personal future as someone who is going into the arts, because it looks like, according to the excerpt, by the time I enter the work force, I will be more respected and more in demand. It renewed my passion to see more art in the world.

Amy Tan’s “Where does Creativity Hide?” TED Talk Essay

TED talks have always fascinated, inspired, and stimulated me intellectually on a personal level. That being said, I came into Amy Tan’s TED talk titled “Where does creativity hide?” with an open mind. However, as Tan’s talk progressed, I developed a gut feeling that I could not shake off. It was only at the end of the second viewing that I accepted that this was the only TED talk to disappoint me to date. This is saying something given that it is about a subject near and dear to my heart: creativity. What disturbs me about this TED talk (and to be honest, what gave me a head ache) was irrelevant material and an unsettling lack of focus.

Tan opens her talk with acknowledging that she has a limited amount of time in which to present her information and yet she wastes some of the time she just emphasized the value of on what she calls the “TED Commandments.” This piece of information is not relevant to her point, which is to explore where creativity comes from; its only purpose is for laughs, and it is placed in the worst possible place in her speech: in the beginning. To me, if one insists on including jokes, that is fine- comic relief is a healthy break for the viewer or reader in perhaps a more complex subject. However, jokes should be relevant to the subject being discussed, or else should be placed at the end if one has already covered the core points and if time permits. Because of this, she did not create a foundation of focus in her beginning. Her Parameters of Discussion theory was also irrelevant. It was interesting but not truly needed, and perhaps would have been perfectly fine if she had let us say an hour long allotment, which she did not. The dog that emerges from her bag was admittedly a surprising (and let us admit it, cute) conclusion, but the point was unclear. Was it to be spontaneous? Was it to show that creativity can come out of the most unlikely of places? It does not matter so much what was the intended purpose as to the fact that the purpose is unclear to the viewer.

Tan’s delivery is for the most part mono-tone. Her sentences are hard to distinguish from each other. If her speech was an essay, it would be nothing but comma splices. If it is possible, I can hear her comma splices. The ending of her sentences are merely the beginning of the following ones. Her speaking in this way, combined with the speed with which she spoke, leaves the viewer feeling they need to make a conscious effort to keep up with her. Perhaps if she had less material, she would not have felt the need to rush her words as much or jump from topic to topic so as to fit it all in her time allotment. I would have cut the information to be covered in half. While she did have some profound and thought provoking points, the viewer did not have time to fully comprehend and internalize an idea, because she was already on the next point. Her TED talk was convoluted and at times cryptic. There were some sentences that I was not sure if they were meant to be jokes or profound. For example, when she is explaining her unnecessary Parameters of Discussion theory, she utters “…my left brain and my right brain and the one that’s in between tells me that what I’m saying is wrong.” Wrong? Wrong about what exactly? Also, she had what I thought to be ineffective transitions. For instance, the slides titled “genocide” and “torture” are not accurate and perhaps a little misleading, because she does not talk specifically about those two subjects and whether or not there are mean to be some clever metaphor is not even apparent.

Overall, Amy Tan’s TED talk was all over the place and long-winded. While she had some profound points, she simply had too much material, which caused a lack of focus.

Hello world!

Welcome to your brand new blog at St. Edwards University Sites.

To get started, simply log in, edit or delete this post and check out all the other options available to you.

For assistance, visit our comprehensive support site, check out our Edublogs User Guide guide or stop by The Edublogs Forums to chat with other edubloggers.

You can also subscribe to our brilliant free publication, The Edublogger, which is jammed with helpful tips, ideas and more.