"You're reading aloud from the transcript of a conversation you're still having?" - Sally Sparrow, Doctor Who episode "Blink" by Steven Moffat.
Actual Facebook chat, still in progress...
Sujan hi
Karen hello! :)
Sujan how ru
where u from
Karen I'm in Arizona. It's 5:39 AM and I'm thinking about going to bed.
'cause I'm not good at sleeping at night!
Where are you?
Sujan nepal
Karen wow.
I love that Facebook has people all over the world.
We have mountains here, but not huge ones. they only get snow a few times a year.
Sujan here no snow fall that way so boring
Karen We pretty much don't have a winter.
Sujan haha
male or female
Karen female
Sujan ok
what do u do
Karen accountant. need a job.
married, almost 30 years.
no kids, 2 dogs, no cats.
Sujan ok nice to met u
hahah
i m not married
24 years
Karen We were all young once! ;);)
Sujan oooo
Karen I hope you meet lots of cool people on FB
Sujan ya thanks
u already met it
Sujan r u there
Karen yes, but trying to get other stuff done too so I can go to bed.
Sujan with ur husband or single
Karen told you. Married 30 years. Very, very married.
He's an editor.
Sujan hahaha
sory
o nice
Believe it or not, this is not the most awkward chat I've had on Facebook, although it's close. The winning entry for that was a conversation with a young woman who wanted to chat about Wrestlemania and Twilight and the movie version of Buffy.
You know, it's not hard to find out more about me online. I pretty much spill my guts in this blog on a daily basis. But people would rather make a personal connection with a complete stranger in some awkward chat on an extremely glitchy server than find out something about the other person first. If you're a young man in a distant country, looking for online female companionship, I'm not what you're looking for. Really, really not. And this is pretty clear from my Facebook profile, let alone my blog, my two main online bios, and everything I've ever written on any social networking site.
But I suspect that most initiators of online chat with strangers, aside from those with legitimate business, i.e. questions related to online gaming etc., aren't looking to make friends per se, much less get to know all about some unemployed accountant in Tucson. The opposite of talking is waiting, the saying goes, and that's true online as well. Sujan didn't chat me up to learn about the mountains in Tucson. He wants to know if I'm young and female and amenable to flirting. And one out of three doesn't cut it.
That's fine. People go online for all kinds of reasons, but the biggest one is to communicate, to make some kind of connection with other people. I do this mostly through blogging. Other people do it through gaming or chat - even awkward chat. And Sujan was perfectly polite, and I wish him well. But yes, I'm married. Move on, please.
And I think he has.
Sujan is offline.
Karen
P.S. I should mention the other side of the coin. Another new "friend" turned up on one of the "add me" boards for the game Vampire Wars, where people go to find additional allies for the game. Two things: 1. as far as I can tell, she's never even set up a character name for the game, let alone played it. 2. Her profile picture is of a seriously sexy woman lounging provacatively on a bed, dressed in skimpy black lace underwear. Perhaps I should introduce her to Sujan?
Showing posts with label Human nature. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Human nature. Show all posts
Thursday, April 09, 2009
Sunday, March 15, 2009
Religion As a Cost-Benefit Calculation
Here's a thought I had tonight. I'm not sure it really goes anywhere or is useful in any way, but here goes:
The claim is often made that human beings act entirely in their own self-interest; that is, they do everything because they expect to benefit in some way, even if that benefit is just to feel virtuous. I've always found this to be an overly cynical way of looking at human behavior, but it's hard to argue your way out of that basic proposition. We do things expecting to benefit from our actions.
Conversely, though, we also avoid things out of self-interest. "It hurts" might be our secret excuse for putting off dentistry. "It's too much trouble" is our way of letting inertia have its way. "What if they don't like me?" might keep you from auditioning or speaking up. And so on. That's the crux of cost-benefit analysis in everyday life. If the attraction of the expected benefit is greater than the avoidance generated by expected negative consequences, we will probably do whatever it is. If not, then not.
Let's apply this idea first to a simple behavior before moving on to a more problematic one. Let's say some annoying blogger (to name no names!) keeps mentioning certain games on Facebook. If a reader of that blog isn't even on Facebook and thinks Facebook is too much trouble, a waste of time, etc., chances are that reader will never try the game, even if it sounds vaguely interesting. But if the reader is on Facebook already, and the reader expects to enjoy the game, he or she may well try it. The expected benefit (having fun) outweigh the expected cost (dealing with Facebook and learning the game).
Having tried the game, the reader has another calculation to make. Is the game actually fun? Are there new costs to balance against the fun? Well, yes. In the case of the games I'm thinking of, it is difficult to progress (and thus have fun) without soliciting friends (or strangers, or both) as allies in the game. Is it worth the effort? Some will still find the benefit outweighs the cost, but others will not. And there are further calculations beyond that.
It's the same thing with eating, or going to the gym, or even going to work. Is it worth preparing a proper meal, or is a bowl of cereal nearly as great a benefit for less cost? Is the benefit the body and mind will derive from working out greater than the benefit of relaxing in front of the tv instead? Is the job worth the daily slog, knowing that good jobs are scarce and there are bills to be paid?
Okay, now here's the tricky part. I've been thinking tonight about how easy it is to persuade some people to become avid gamers, and wondering how this whole cost-benefit mechanism applies to religion in general, and going to church specifically. If the person is a confirmed atheist - that is, utterly convinced that there is no God - then it would be extremely difficult to provide that person with sufficient expected benefit for that person to attend church. The primary benefit others perceive would not apply. The social component, in which the person expects to enjoy being around other people in a group activity, is outweighed by considerations of possible hypocrisy and supporting what one does not believe in. Really, the only scenarios I can think of in which an atheist would go to a traditional church involve either the benefit of a non-religious activity - e.g. receiving a bag of groceries in a time of need, or being involved in providing services to others in need - or an unusual degree of expected cost of not going, such as when the spouse nags the person into it, or the politician is aware that atheism would not go down well with many of his constituents.
That's one extreme. At the other extreme, the True Believer believes that the expected benefit, namely eternal life, etc., outweighs any possible cost. But what if the person believes the expected benefit can be derived without the cost? Maybe it's enough to believe a certain way, without the trouble of going to church. Or what if the promised benefit doesn't seem real and immediate, compared with the cost? Heaven is a pie-in-the-sky, long-term consideration, like losing weight. Sometimes you'd just rather have the pie on the plate. Instant gratification is a powerful thing. Result: if the immense but distant (or vaguely believed) expected benefit of going to church is outweighed by the feeling that "it's too much trouble" or "maybe next week," then even the believer may not show up on Sunday.
So what if you're a pastor, a vestry member, a church webmaster, or someone else with an interest in bringing more people into the church? The obvious thing to do is to try to influence the potential churchgoer's cost-benefit analysis. Either the expected benefit needs to be as strong as possible, or the expected cost needs to be as light as possible, or both. Here are some possibilities:
But how do I take this insight and try to convince people who don't know Kevin and Proscovia and the rest that the benefit of attending St. Michael's outweighs the inertia of "it's too much trouble" or "what if they don't like me?" Well, aside from assuring folks that of course we'll like you, I have no idea. I only know that about 12 years ago, I overcame my own inertia in the expectation of possible benefit in attending that church on Wilmot, the one with the sign. And for a dozen years, the benefit has far outweighed the cost.
Karen
The claim is often made that human beings act entirely in their own self-interest; that is, they do everything because they expect to benefit in some way, even if that benefit is just to feel virtuous. I've always found this to be an overly cynical way of looking at human behavior, but it's hard to argue your way out of that basic proposition. We do things expecting to benefit from our actions.
Conversely, though, we also avoid things out of self-interest. "It hurts" might be our secret excuse for putting off dentistry. "It's too much trouble" is our way of letting inertia have its way. "What if they don't like me?" might keep you from auditioning or speaking up. And so on. That's the crux of cost-benefit analysis in everyday life. If the attraction of the expected benefit is greater than the avoidance generated by expected negative consequences, we will probably do whatever it is. If not, then not.
Let's apply this idea first to a simple behavior before moving on to a more problematic one. Let's say some annoying blogger (to name no names!) keeps mentioning certain games on Facebook. If a reader of that blog isn't even on Facebook and thinks Facebook is too much trouble, a waste of time, etc., chances are that reader will never try the game, even if it sounds vaguely interesting. But if the reader is on Facebook already, and the reader expects to enjoy the game, he or she may well try it. The expected benefit (having fun) outweigh the expected cost (dealing with Facebook and learning the game).
Having tried the game, the reader has another calculation to make. Is the game actually fun? Are there new costs to balance against the fun? Well, yes. In the case of the games I'm thinking of, it is difficult to progress (and thus have fun) without soliciting friends (or strangers, or both) as allies in the game. Is it worth the effort? Some will still find the benefit outweighs the cost, but others will not. And there are further calculations beyond that.
It's the same thing with eating, or going to the gym, or even going to work. Is it worth preparing a proper meal, or is a bowl of cereal nearly as great a benefit for less cost? Is the benefit the body and mind will derive from working out greater than the benefit of relaxing in front of the tv instead? Is the job worth the daily slog, knowing that good jobs are scarce and there are bills to be paid?
Okay, now here's the tricky part. I've been thinking tonight about how easy it is to persuade some people to become avid gamers, and wondering how this whole cost-benefit mechanism applies to religion in general, and going to church specifically. If the person is a confirmed atheist - that is, utterly convinced that there is no God - then it would be extremely difficult to provide that person with sufficient expected benefit for that person to attend church. The primary benefit others perceive would not apply. The social component, in which the person expects to enjoy being around other people in a group activity, is outweighed by considerations of possible hypocrisy and supporting what one does not believe in. Really, the only scenarios I can think of in which an atheist would go to a traditional church involve either the benefit of a non-religious activity - e.g. receiving a bag of groceries in a time of need, or being involved in providing services to others in need - or an unusual degree of expected cost of not going, such as when the spouse nags the person into it, or the politician is aware that atheism would not go down well with many of his constituents.
That's one extreme. At the other extreme, the True Believer believes that the expected benefit, namely eternal life, etc., outweighs any possible cost. But what if the person believes the expected benefit can be derived without the cost? Maybe it's enough to believe a certain way, without the trouble of going to church. Or what if the promised benefit doesn't seem real and immediate, compared with the cost? Heaven is a pie-in-the-sky, long-term consideration, like losing weight. Sometimes you'd just rather have the pie on the plate. Instant gratification is a powerful thing. Result: if the immense but distant (or vaguely believed) expected benefit of going to church is outweighed by the feeling that "it's too much trouble" or "maybe next week," then even the believer may not show up on Sunday.
So what if you're a pastor, a vestry member, a church webmaster, or someone else with an interest in bringing more people into the church? The obvious thing to do is to try to influence the potential churchgoer's cost-benefit analysis. Either the expected benefit needs to be as strong as possible, or the expected cost needs to be as light as possible, or both. Here are some possibilities:
- Convince others that the cost of not attending church is too great to be viable. This is the nuclear option, the idea that skipping church is a mortal sin. Hey, it worked for Catholics for many years.
- Convince others that there is an immediate, observable benefit from attending church. Make it fun, or inspiring. Give us magnificent or hip music, a great sermon, coffee and doughnuts. Market the church as the "cool church," and yourself as the "fighting young priest who can talk to the young."
- Make it easy to go, so the burden is light. Offer day care and Sunday school so there's no babysitter issue. Have services at a variety of convenient times. Have plenty of free parking. And maybe, just maybe, ask very little of churchgoers in the way of living out their faith. Don't ask them to feed the hungry or visit the prisoners, or to love their enemies. Skip over anything that might require critical thought or an unselfish attitude. Yeah, that'll get 'em.
But how do I take this insight and try to convince people who don't know Kevin and Proscovia and the rest that the benefit of attending St. Michael's outweighs the inertia of "it's too much trouble" or "what if they don't like me?" Well, aside from assuring folks that of course we'll like you, I have no idea. I only know that about 12 years ago, I overcame my own inertia in the expectation of possible benefit in attending that church on Wilmot, the one with the sign. And for a dozen years, the benefit has far outweighed the cost.
Karen
Friday, August 08, 2008
Weekend Assignment #228: Design an Award!
As you can see from my previous two entries, Florinda of The 3 R's: Reading, 'Riting, and Randomness recently received a "Brillante Weblog" award, which she then awarded to Mike of Everything Under the Sun (among others), who in turn awarded it to Carly and to me (among others). These fun recognitions make the rounds from time to time, and I think it might be interesting to shake things up a bit. To wit:
Weekend Assignment #228: Design your own blog award, recognizing one particular virtue found in some blogs (e.g. political savvy, humor, an engaging prose style, a particular kind of photography, etc.). Award it to one - and only one - blog, and explain your choice!
Extra Credit: Who is your runner-up for that same award?
I've been at this blogging thing for a while now (since March, 2004), received several recognitions of one sort or another (always a bit of a thrill!), and have had a number of opportunities to recommend other blogs I enjoy. This latest award thingy calls for me to award it to seven other blogs. My sleep schedule being what it is, I won't have time to do that properly until the weekend, especially since I'm determined to choose blogs I haven't given similar honors in the past. So for tonight, let me just design and present a singular, specialized award:
The Golden TARDIS Award is designed to recognize one blog that is of interest to Doctor Who fans, but transcends that category by covering a variety of subjects with humor and insight. Believe it or not, a number of blogs exist that fit those parameters!
On my sidebar is a section of links entitled Who Blogs? The blogs on it are by people who write for Doctor Who, write about Doctor Who, or both. (One of them played the title role in Doctor Who.) From a writing standpoint, my favorites are the ones by Who scripters Paul Cornell (of Paul Cornell's House of Awkwardness) and James Moran (The Pen Is Mightier Than the Spork).
Some of the people who write about Doctor Who specialize in just that on their blogs, which is perfectly fine with me. But the working professionals, especially Cornell and Moran as well as actor Colin Baker, cover more territory than that. Baker writes (when he blogs at all) mostly about his current acting gigs, and Cornell and Moran write about their various and sundry writing gigs, the writing process, awards, travels, and a little bit about their lives. In May of this year, Paul Cornell wrote a truly harrowing (yet strangely amusing) account of a serious car accident that he and his wife fortunately survived with minor injuries. Amazing. I guess what I'm saying is, come for the Doctor Who tidbits, stay for the insights and the great writing.
Paul Cornell is at Worldcon this weekend, up for a Hugo Award for his wonderful Doctor Who story Human Nature / The Family of Blood. Even if Steven Moffat wins instead (for Blink, which is also quite good), Paul doesn't need my silly little award. But tough - he's getting it anyway. And my runner-up, James Moran, will no doubt be up for some major awards of his own in years to come.
Your turn! Come up with your own specialized blogging award, award it, and tell us about it in your blog or journal. Don't forget to link to the honored blog as well as back here, and don't forget to link to your own entry in the comments below. I'll be back with our own little award ceremony a week from now!
Karen
Weekend Assignment #228: Design your own blog award, recognizing one particular virtue found in some blogs (e.g. political savvy, humor, an engaging prose style, a particular kind of photography, etc.). Award it to one - and only one - blog, and explain your choice!
Extra Credit: Who is your runner-up for that same award?
I've been at this blogging thing for a while now (since March, 2004), received several recognitions of one sort or another (always a bit of a thrill!), and have had a number of opportunities to recommend other blogs I enjoy. This latest award thingy calls for me to award it to seven other blogs. My sleep schedule being what it is, I won't have time to do that properly until the weekend, especially since I'm determined to choose blogs I haven't given similar honors in the past. So for tonight, let me just design and present a singular, specialized award:
The Golden TARDIS Award is designed to recognize one blog that is of interest to Doctor Who fans, but transcends that category by covering a variety of subjects with humor and insight. Believe it or not, a number of blogs exist that fit those parameters!
On my sidebar is a section of links entitled Who Blogs? The blogs on it are by people who write for Doctor Who, write about Doctor Who, or both. (One of them played the title role in Doctor Who.) From a writing standpoint, my favorites are the ones by Who scripters Paul Cornell (of Paul Cornell's House of Awkwardness) and James Moran (The Pen Is Mightier Than the Spork).
Some of the people who write about Doctor Who specialize in just that on their blogs, which is perfectly fine with me. But the working professionals, especially Cornell and Moran as well as actor Colin Baker, cover more territory than that. Baker writes (when he blogs at all) mostly about his current acting gigs, and Cornell and Moran write about their various and sundry writing gigs, the writing process, awards, travels, and a little bit about their lives. In May of this year, Paul Cornell wrote a truly harrowing (yet strangely amusing) account of a serious car accident that he and his wife fortunately survived with minor injuries. Amazing. I guess what I'm saying is, come for the Doctor Who tidbits, stay for the insights and the great writing.Paul Cornell is at Worldcon this weekend, up for a Hugo Award for his wonderful Doctor Who story Human Nature / The Family of Blood. Even if Steven Moffat wins instead (for Blink, which is also quite good), Paul doesn't need my silly little award. But tough - he's getting it anyway. And my runner-up, James Moran, will no doubt be up for some major awards of his own in years to come.
Your turn! Come up with your own specialized blogging award, award it, and tell us about it in your blog or journal. Don't forget to link to the honored blog as well as back here, and don't forget to link to your own entry in the comments below. I'll be back with our own little award ceremony a week from now!
Karen
Sunday, March 09, 2008
Who Is This Guy? A Recital Review
The antiphonal section of the organ, May 2005
A friend of mine from church took me out to dinner this evening, followed by a pipe organ recital by Alan Schultz in honor of the 50th Anniversary of St. Michael & All Angels Day School. Mr. Schultz (as his former students call him) or Alan (as longtime parishioners call him) recently retired from the school after teaching there for over four decades. I know him mostly as the substitute organist who occasionally plays at the 10 AM mass - not just Bach and such, but his own sacred classical works as well.
Tonight he started us off with Fantasy in G by J.S. Bach, turning much of it into a call and response between the main section of pipes behind the sanctuary in the front of the church and the antiphonal pipes above the back door. He said it was supposed to represent sets of angels singing to each other. It was interesting to hear, and made more use of the organ's capabilities than the average Sunday hymn.
Mr. Schultz introduces a composition.Next came the premiere performance of Schultz's Psalmist Songs, "a song cycle for mezzo, English horn and organ." This was based on seven psalms (1, 121, 31, 45, 103, 133 and 126) sung by mezzo-soprano Korby Myrick, accompanied by Alan on organ and Kay Trondsen on English Horn. One of the psalms reminded me strongly of the L'Engle novel The Moon By Night, which quotes from it extensively.
Mr. Schultz plays a fugue.Alan finished the recital with seven selections from his Twenty-four Preludes and Fugues in All Keys for Organ, which was also being premiered. He explained that in Bach's day, an innovation in the way instruments were tuned made certain keys, which sounded awful before, usable for the first time. Bach eventually composed two sets of Preludes and Fugues to cover each of the twelve major and twelve minor keys. Schultz has composed one set. He explained all this, and a little bit about what a prelude is and what a fugue is. I didn't really quite catch on what exactly defines each of this musical forms, but I gather that the fugue part developed from the canon, or round, which in turn arose naturally in medieval times from people not starting a chant at quite the same time. At one point Alan demonstrated the form by having the audience sing Row, Row Row Your Boat. These introductions reminded me a little of Leonard Bernstein's Concerts for Young People when I was a kid. He ended the performance by having us sing a particular hymn that led directly into his Fantasy, Fugue and Variation on "Divinum Mysterium" in E-flat major.
Before and after the recital there were prayers from Father Smith and testimonial speeches from several people associated with the school and its students. I had vaguely gathered that Alan taught English as well as music, but was surprised to learn that this was perhaps the most important part of his legacy at St. Michael's Day School. His eighth grade students learned to write research papers, something I wasn't exposed to until my senior year in high school. One speaker credited him with turning his students into "grammar police," and a former student of his joked that he tries "to never split...I mean, never to split infinitives" because of Mr. Schultz. The student's parents said they needed a dictionary to look up words in Mr. Schultz's report card evaluations, and the father, a professor, said he has higher standards for papers from former St. Michael's students because of Mr. Schultz. The headmaster talked about Schultz joking about buying a supermarket just so that the express checkout would allow "10 items or fewer." He sounds like my kind of guy!
Newspaper photos from his career adorn a centerpiece.It turns out this man I've seen around the parish for a decade, and occasionally heard play, is a bit of a renaissance man. Today's program calls him a "composer, teacher, conductor, organist, harpsichordist and author." He was music director of the Southern Arizona Symphony Orchestra for 15 seasons, and he's a former director of the Tucson Masterworks Chorale. He's written a book on teaching organ, had several recordings released, and has had both music and poetry published. Wow! And to think he was basically "just zis guy" to me until tonight.
Afterward at the reception, I tried to express my appreciation upon learning more about him, especially the English teacher bits. I somewhat nonsensically compared the recital to "a cross between Leonard Bernstein's Concerts for Young People and the writing of Madeleine L'Engle," a compliment he accepted graciously. To be honest, I'm a bit of a Philistine with respect to classical music; I do like it, including Schultz's own contributions to the genre, but not enough to seek it out or make an effort to learn more about it. Still, even my relatively untrained ear can tell that his music is creative, ambitious, and well-executed.
I remarked to my friend before the recital that St. Michael's can be represented by a big Venn diagram, with overlapping populations of students, faculty, staff, choir, parishioners who normally attend each of the three Sunday masses and thus seldom meet each other, the social concerns people, the Altar Guild people and ECW. There was a good selection from each of those groups there tonight, including one writer and former journalist I'd like to get to know better.
Given this revelation about someone I took for granted, I can't help but wonder: if this man I see each week at the 10 AM mass can be as accomplished and interesting as Alan Schultz, what about all the other people behind those familiar faces? I overheard one woman this evening mentioning that she was a nurse in Vietnam. Another parishioner is an expert on Byzantine art. We have engineers and astronomers, mathematicians and professors, photographers and who knows what else, some retired, some still working. What fascinating biographies do these people have, unknown by a shy fellow parishioner who barely scratches the surface of their acquaintance?
But maybe it's not important that I get to know each person in depth, learn all about their careers and their hobbies, their trips to Spain, their military careers, and their stories in major newspapers. Maybe it's enough to know and to remember that they're all people, mostly intelligent, talented people, each making unique contributions to the world and its people, each with his or her own "spark of divine fire." Occasionally, if I pay attention, I may even see them glow.
Karen
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
Human Nature
Yes, it's Round Robin time again. Our newest Challenge, "Nature," comes to us from Gina, of Gina's Space.
When I introduced the topic on the Round Robin blog nearly two weeks ago, I teased myself by asking the question, "Are you hung up on sunsets?" I do post a lot of sunset photos, so it would not surprise me at all if a few of you come to this entry expecting to see more of the same. I don't like to be that predictable, so we'll give the setting sun a rest for tonight. Besides, as I thought about this topic, and the fact that I haven't had much chance recently to photograph birds and bunnies and such, a certain phrase kept popping into my head: "Human nature."
A hummingbird takes a break at Taliesin West
Humans are both part of nature and, by definition, the source of all departures from it. Our marvelous brains, our hands with those all-important opposable thumbs, and every other body part we were born with arise from the same source as the bunny's ears and the hummingbird's wings. All are part of the natural world, the amazing system of physics, chemistry and biology that makes the world what it is. I don't want to renew the usual arguments here, but I think of nature as a set of rules that God set up long ago to create everything that is, the blueprint that forms a large part of the divine plan.
A rock with petroglyphs at Taliesin West.
When I introduced the topic on the Round Robin blog nearly two weeks ago, I teased myself by asking the question, "Are you hung up on sunsets?" I do post a lot of sunset photos, so it would not surprise me at all if a few of you come to this entry expecting to see more of the same. I don't like to be that predictable, so we'll give the setting sun a rest for tonight. Besides, as I thought about this topic, and the fact that I haven't had much chance recently to photograph birds and bunnies and such, a certain phrase kept popping into my head: "Human nature."
A hummingbird takes a break at Taliesin WestHumans are both part of nature and, by definition, the source of all departures from it. Our marvelous brains, our hands with those all-important opposable thumbs, and every other body part we were born with arise from the same source as the bunny's ears and the hummingbird's wings. All are part of the natural world, the amazing system of physics, chemistry and biology that makes the world what it is. I don't want to renew the usual arguments here, but I think of nature as a set of rules that God set up long ago to create everything that is, the blueprint that forms a large part of the divine plan.
A rock with petroglyphs at Taliesin West.It is not in the nature of humans, however, to leave the rest of nature alone. Thousands of years ago, we were scratching odd designs into rocks, and painting on cave walls. The first time we sharpened a stick or planted seeds in furrowed rows with that revolutionary invention, the plow, we were making something artificial. We were taking nature and "improving" it, adapting it to our use. We love nature, by and large, but we always have to tinker with it. Who among us would want to do without clothing in winter and summer, lie on the floor of a cave every night, and eat only what we could catch with our hands? No. We appreciate nature, but we can't live in it. Not really. So we take what we like from nature, and fashion it into what we think will make us productive and comfortable and, we hope, happy.
The edge of the desert that surrounds Taliesin West
So it was with the famous architect Frank Lloyd Wright (June 8, 1867 - April 9, 1959). He loved the Arizona desert so much that he bought a chunk of it, miles from civilization. All these years later, much of that original parcel of land remains untouched. At first he lived in tents in the middle of it all, but soon he built his winter home there. He named it Taliesin West.
Taliesin West was designed not to stand out from
its natural surroundings.
Nowadays, Taliesin West isn't all that far from civilization. It's in Scottsdale, Arizona, but in a relatively remote part of it. The property remains very nearly unspoiled, because of Wright's foresight in buying up a lot of land at bargain prices, and leaving much of it in its original state. To get there, a visitor goes north on Frank Lloyd Wright Drive at the northeastern edge of metro Phoenix, and then follows a private drive for half a mile, climbing through Sonoran Desert scrub. For most of that drive, no buildings can be seen, left, right, or up ahead.
Frank Lloyd Wright's studio at Taliesin West originally
had no glass in the windows.
Wright built a studio at Taliesin West, with interesting stones visible inside and out in the handmade walls, canvas roofing to let in the light, and, originally, open air instead of glass windows. It didn't bother him if birds, squirrels or even snakes stopped by for a visit. Eventually, though his third wife talked him into adding glass windows, which he agreed (in retrospect) was a good idea. His style of incorporating nature into his designs was called organic architecture.
Frank Lloyd Wright's living room is a mixture
of natural and artificial elements.
I can't remember now whether it was Wright's studio or his living room that had another change made after the original construction, raising the wall so that the windows had a higher view of the desert beyond. The reason for this was that civilization had arrived at the edge of Wright's domain, in the form of power lines and telephone poles. Taliesin West was self-sufficient for a while in terms of well water and electricity, and during that period the only power lines were underground. Eventually, though, the poles arrived, a little way down the hill, spoiling Wright's view. He didn't want to see anything out his windows except nature, and perhaps a few things he personally put there. He would be horrified if he saw what stands at the bottom of his land today: at least a dozen of those huge high voltage electrical towers, carrying power across the desert to feed the human need to control and improve on nature.
A collage by Clare Booth Luce in Wright's living room, made
of all natural materials, is nevertheless a work of artifice.
Isn't the adulteration of nature pretty much the definition of art, though? Art is short for artifice, the source of the word artificial. Wright's buildings may have used wood and stone and been decorated with fur and clay pottery, but they were works of art, adaptations of natural materials into something the architect considered both aesthetic and practical. And it wasn't just Wright who did this. For example, the decorative panel shown above was one of two pieces of art made for Wright's living room by pioneering journalist and playwright Clare Booth Luce. It's made of saguaro ribs, chunks of dried cholla, stones, shells and seeds. It's all natural, and completely artificial. Nature provided the materials, but it took a human to arrange them in this particular way.
A former apprentice's sculptures at Taliesin West
And so it goes. In creating art, we both imitate nature and alter it, reflecting back what it means to us, using it to discover more about nature and ourselves. Even this blog entry is an attempt to turn nature into art, and art into a window on the inside of a human being - human nature. If I had posted a sunset photo tonight, it would have been a digital photo, a way preserving an image from nature in the artificial construct of ones and zeros. It would have been further removed from the original interplay of star and planetary atmosphere by the use of photo editing tools, making the sunset a little brighter and more colorful. I didn't do that tonight, but the same process, more or less, went into the photos that accompany this marathon text. They have been cropped or lightened or darkened or saturated, and one has been narrowed at the top to fix the perspective. And yet, all of those edits were done to approximate what my natural eyes saw - through articificial lenses, of course.
And now I'm done. Go see what the other Robins are up to!
Karen
Linking List
Gina
Gina's Space
http://journals.aol.com/rbrown6172/Ginasspace
Karen - POSTED!
Outpost Mâvarin
http://outmavarin.blogspot.com/
Nancy
Nancy Luvs Pics
http://journals.aol.com/nhd106/Nancyluvspix/
Janet
Fond Of Photography
http://www.fondofphotography.blogspot.com/
Kerrin - POSTED!
A New Day, A New Photo
http://kerrinsdailyphoto.blogspot.com/
Carly - POSTED!
Ellipsis... Suddenly Carly
http://ellipsissuddenlycarly.blogspot.com/
Annie =)
The Light's On...But No One's Home
http://journals.aol.com/krspkrmmom/nooneshome
Suzanne R - POSTED!
New Suzanne R's Life
http://newsuzannerslife.blogspot.com/
boliyou - POSTED!
Percolation
http://boliyou.blogspot.com/2007/03/round-robin-photo-challenge-nature.html
Brad
We-Is
http://we-is.blogspot.com/
Meg - POSTED! ****Welcome New Member****
In Quest Of
http://journals.aol.com/inquestoftruth/InQuestOf/
Steven - POSTED!
(sometimes)photoblog
http://sepintx.blogspot.com/
Dorn - POSTED!
Through The Eyes Of The Beholder
http://journals.aol.com/dornbrau/ThroughtheEyesoftheBeholder
Gattina - POSTED!
Keyhole Pictures
http://gattina-keyholepictures.blogspot.com/
Teena - POSTED!
It's all about me!
http://purple4mee.blogspot.com
Julie - POSTED!
Stately Barrett Manor
http://www.barrettmanor.com/julie/archive.aspx?ID=1439
The edge of the desert that surrounds Taliesin WestSo it was with the famous architect Frank Lloyd Wright (June 8, 1867 - April 9, 1959). He loved the Arizona desert so much that he bought a chunk of it, miles from civilization. All these years later, much of that original parcel of land remains untouched. At first he lived in tents in the middle of it all, but soon he built his winter home there. He named it Taliesin West.
Taliesin West was designed not to stand out fromits natural surroundings.
Nowadays, Taliesin West isn't all that far from civilization. It's in Scottsdale, Arizona, but in a relatively remote part of it. The property remains very nearly unspoiled, because of Wright's foresight in buying up a lot of land at bargain prices, and leaving much of it in its original state. To get there, a visitor goes north on Frank Lloyd Wright Drive at the northeastern edge of metro Phoenix, and then follows a private drive for half a mile, climbing through Sonoran Desert scrub. For most of that drive, no buildings can be seen, left, right, or up ahead.
Frank Lloyd Wright's studio at Taliesin West originallyhad no glass in the windows.
Wright built a studio at Taliesin West, with interesting stones visible inside and out in the handmade walls, canvas roofing to let in the light, and, originally, open air instead of glass windows. It didn't bother him if birds, squirrels or even snakes stopped by for a visit. Eventually, though his third wife talked him into adding glass windows, which he agreed (in retrospect) was a good idea. His style of incorporating nature into his designs was called organic architecture.
Frank Lloyd Wright's living room is a mixtureof natural and artificial elements.
I can't remember now whether it was Wright's studio or his living room that had another change made after the original construction, raising the wall so that the windows had a higher view of the desert beyond. The reason for this was that civilization had arrived at the edge of Wright's domain, in the form of power lines and telephone poles. Taliesin West was self-sufficient for a while in terms of well water and electricity, and during that period the only power lines were underground. Eventually, though, the poles arrived, a little way down the hill, spoiling Wright's view. He didn't want to see anything out his windows except nature, and perhaps a few things he personally put there. He would be horrified if he saw what stands at the bottom of his land today: at least a dozen of those huge high voltage electrical towers, carrying power across the desert to feed the human need to control and improve on nature.
A collage by Clare Booth Luce in Wright's living room, madeof all natural materials, is nevertheless a work of artifice.
A former apprentice's sculptures at Taliesin WestAnd so it goes. In creating art, we both imitate nature and alter it, reflecting back what it means to us, using it to discover more about nature and ourselves. Even this blog entry is an attempt to turn nature into art, and art into a window on the inside of a human being - human nature. If I had posted a sunset photo tonight, it would have been a digital photo, a way preserving an image from nature in the artificial construct of ones and zeros. It would have been further removed from the original interplay of star and planetary atmosphere by the use of photo editing tools, making the sunset a little brighter and more colorful. I didn't do that tonight, but the same process, more or less, went into the photos that accompany this marathon text. They have been cropped or lightened or darkened or saturated, and one has been narrowed at the top to fix the perspective. And yet, all of those edits were done to approximate what my natural eyes saw - through articificial lenses, of course.
And now I'm done. Go see what the other Robins are up to!
Karen
Linking List
Gina
Gina's Space
http://journals.aol.com/rbrown6172/Ginasspace
Karen - POSTED!
Outpost Mâvarin
http://outmavarin.blogspot.com/
Nancy
Nancy Luvs Pics
http://journals.aol.com/nhd106/Nancyluvspix/
Janet
Fond Of Photography
http://www.fondofphotography.blogspot.com/
Kerrin - POSTED!
A New Day, A New Photo
http://kerrinsdailyphoto.blogspot.com/
Carly - POSTED!
Ellipsis... Suddenly Carly
http://ellipsissuddenlycarly.blogspot.com/
Annie =)
The Light's On...But No One's Home
http://journals.aol.com/krspkrmmom/nooneshome
Suzanne R - POSTED!
New Suzanne R's Life
http://newsuzannerslife.blogspot.com/
boliyou - POSTED!
Percolation
http://boliyou.blogspot.com/2007/03/round-robin-photo-challenge-nature.html
Brad
We-Is
http://we-is.blogspot.com/
Meg - POSTED! ****Welcome New Member****
In Quest Of
http://journals.aol.com/inquestoftruth/InQuestOf/
Steven - POSTED!
(sometimes)photoblog
http://sepintx.blogspot.com/
Dorn - POSTED!
Through The Eyes Of The Beholder
http://journals.aol.com/dornbrau/ThroughtheEyesoftheBeholder
Gattina - POSTED!
Keyhole Pictures
http://gattina-keyholepictures.blogspot.com/
Teena - POSTED!
It's all about me!
http://purple4mee.blogspot.com
Julie - POSTED!
Stately Barrett Manor
http://www.barrettmanor.com/julie/archive.aspx?ID=1439
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)