Getting the News

Although I would love to say that I consistently read a daily newspaper, I don't think the Daily Trojan counts as "reading the paper." It always used to be a highly praised attribute in my family if you read the paper, but I just never saw the enjoyment in it.

Many people read news papers because of everything they get out of it. They get their headline stories, their opinion section often accompanied by differing viewpoints, information about community events and even stock analysis. Personally, when I want the news, I want just that: the news. The fastest way to get the news in my situation is by means of the Internet, something quick that I can read from a highly-acclaimed newspaper company for free. Sometimes I make a conscious effort to read a variety of online news sites, so I'm not completely out of the loop when it comes to global issues. I never visit any particular site on a consistent basis, though. If I'm not checking a site for a specific issue, the news only really seems interesting to me when I'm browsing and find an intriguing headline.

My interests in just getting little bits of information simply don't warrant a full subscription to a newspaper. Online news seems to be the easiest things to satisfy my needs.

Why a computer museum?

For our museum assignment, I chose to focus on and create a museum dedicated to the history of computing. Although I first decided to write about this mainly because it was the best idea I could think of, I later realized that computers really have had a profound impact on our lives and have significantly shaped society as we know it.

One of the main reasons there should be a museum devoted to computers is the sole fact that the subject matter is highly relatable. Most people today own computers or even use computers in the work place; computers are essentially a part of everyone's lives. I challenge anyone to imagine life today without a computer. It would certainly be harder, to say the least.

Computers also have an immense history, just like any other subject that has been enshrined in a museum. They began changing lives when they were first implemented as data-input devices and will continue to change lives in the future as one of the most used pieces of technology currently on the market.

More importantly, though, the aim of the modern museum is to educate. A computer museum would provide an interactive, educational experience beneficial for a broad audience, ranging from those completely inexperienced with computers to even young children. It would provide a valuable experience for the visitor to help them learn about this dynamic force that has changed their lives forever.

The Norton Simon Art Museum

A couple of months ago, some friends and I decided to check out the renowned Norton Simon Art Museum in Pasadena. Sitting right along a busy highway in the heart of one of Southern California's most historical cities, it provides the ideal home to many fantastic works of fine art.

The museum itself is comprised of two floors, one ground-level and a basement. These floors then extend outward to form massive wings on either side of the main hall. I particularly enjoyed the way the artwork was organized, the top floor housing all western works and the basement, eastern. Though one work of the same region after another could become repetitive, the separation provided that clear contrast necessary to understand the vast differences between works of the east and west.

There was not much interactivity employed by the museum, except for guided audio tours. Then again, there can only be so many interactive techniques available when dealing with priceless art.

After visiting the museum, I realized that I knew nearly nothing about some of the great artists responsible for such fine work. With this in regard, I would suggest perhaps a pamphlet that gives a background on some of the major artists represented at the museum or even added information on the cue-cards displayed directly next to the work.

What about the apology?

In regards to the anti-semitic remarks made during his arrest for a DUI, Gibson's apology was definitely appropriate. It probably would have created an even larger uprising had he not apologized, considering how colossal of a public figure he is.

Had the incident simply involved a DUI, Gibson could have probably gotten away with saying that he just acted irrationally. The public would have been very forgiving; actors are people, too, and people can always get too carried away with alcohol. Because Gibson tossed in those anti-semite remarks, however, his situation changed drastically. Those remarks instantly made him a target as a source of prejudice and anti-semitism. He then had to publicly apologize and admit to saying those things even in light of the previously alleged anti-semitic notions of his film "The Passion of the Christ."

The apology itself was pretty all-inclusive. He only left out his exact wording when referring to his remarks. Jewish community leaders, however, were unsatisfied. This incident required more than a simple apology, as Gibson has many more bases to cover in regards to his alleged anti-semitism than this one DUI. Of course, the apology helps his case. If he didn't apologize, some people might have been after his life. Regardless, he owes more than a public, televised statement. At this point, only further action to actually demonstrate his sincerity will convince the Jewish community he is not an anti-semite.

Gibson's Drunken Tirade

On July 28 2006, Oscar-winning actor and director Mel Gibson was arrested on a DUI charge by local police in Malibu, California. A breathalyzer test confirmed Gibson's BAC as .12%, clearly exceeding the state's legal limit of .08%. Upon arrest, Gibson made several anti-semitic remarks to officer James Mee, voicing such profanities as "f***ing jews" and "the jews are responsible for all the wars in the world". Gibson was later contained in a detox-cell until he posted bail the following morning. That next saturday, he issued the following statement.

Initially, one may see this particular incident as simply a feat of drunkenness, where unintentional remarks are made due to the effects of alcohol on the brain. In this case, however, Mel Gibson was not only reprimanded for drunk driving. His anti-semitism has been in question since the release of his graphic film "The Passion of the Christ," due mostly to its very explicit depiction of jewish discrimination in biblical times. It also doesn't help the case when Gibson's father, Hutton Gibson, has been quoted to deny the occurrence of the Holocaust.

Does/did the Jewish community deserve in an apology? Absolutely. Gibson has a lot of ground to cover in terms of totally clearing any anti-semitic sentiment he is alluded to have. His apology seemed fair, as he openly admitted to making those anti-semitic remarks, though it is not the only task he must complete before he is essentially "acquitted" by his peers.

Critical Thinking in Music

Hey Bloggers,

In this next post, we are supposed to answer whether or not our respective field incorporates aspects of critical thinking. I imagine that music certainly does!

While working on this paper, I have to come to agree with many of Bloom's ideas within his taxonomy about the levels of developmental cognitive thinking. Three stand out in my mind: synthesis, analysis, evaluation. In our own classes that we've taken so far, I think most would agree that synthesis and analysis are very much present in everything we do in music. In order to properly analyze a piece, it is important to decipher chord structure, identify non-harmonic tones and detect logical changes in harmony; all of these are abilities that involve not only thinking frequently, but also thinking critically. Essentially, they involve taking many factors into account and forming a well-thought, reasoned decision based on what is present.

This idea also involves the process of evaluation, our ability to look at music and understand everything about it to the point where we can make logical changes or even add on to it. We even evaluate while we perform, if you think about it. Some would say that thinking about air support, fingerings and sound quality is simply thinking a lot. As musicians, however, we take all of these factors and comprehend them to a degree so that we know exactly what to do next to reach the best end result. That's what thinking critically is essentially based on, right? Finding the best possible answer to a question with sound evidence and a valid argument? I think so.

Feel free to post any other suggestions on how you think music enhances our critical thinking skills!

The Fallacy of Assumed Supremacy

In his article “A German Lesson: the Fallacy of One True Path” Daniel Jonah Goldhagen carefully underlines an interesting connection between Pope Benedict XVI’s rejection of the concept of “relativism” and the imperialistic attitude of the Nazis.

One of the first possible sources of this attitude that Goldhagen notes is the Pope’s past involvement in the Hitler youth. Although he abandoned his military duties only one month before the end of the war, Goldhagen suggests that his involvement nonetheless supports the little conversation about the horrors of the Holocaust. He then continues to explain Benedict’s rejection of the concept of “relativism,” the idea that other religions could have possible pathways towards salvation. Such a rejection is quite comparable to the Nazi attitude and its utter sense of supremacy over the Jews.

I imagine that Goldhagen makes this analogy between the current Pope and the Nazi regime to pinpoint the fallacy behind declaring Catholicism as the one true path, declaring the concept as German because of the failure of Nazi Germany to make one true race. In his “Dominus Jesus” Pope Benedict XVI declared the need for the supremacy of the Catholic Church in the modern world and that all further dialogue with other religions should include “the necessity of conversion to Jesus Christ.” This idea of Catholic supremacy over the world directly correlates to the same concept the Nazis had in mind, the only difference being a religion as opposed to a whole race of people. Essentially, the fallacy lies in the Pope’s belief that what he deems as truth is the Truth, just as the Nazis so fervently believed. Simply because either party deemed themselves as “all-powerful” does not actually make their word supreme over that of others. The “because I said so” argument does not work anymore.