Author: Phillip Kim (Page 2 of 2)

The Origins of Contemporary Poetry

Stephano Colangelo came to lecture about origins of contemporary poetry. He first mentions before getting into the heart of the lecture that poetry is a study of literature that produces metaphors to understanding something new about topics. He also expanded that the origins of poetry and especially contemporary poetry is difficult to trace since poetry is abstract and defined it as a state of mind. He said he would use metaphors to understand different parts of contemporary poetry.

One of the more interesting ideas he discussed was Benedetto Croce’s quote that, “art is pure intuition or pure expression.” I believe this is true for all art. There is fluidity in this statement that art is a pure intuition. When someone hears, sees, smell, taste, or feel any art form it, is the person interpreting that is giving the meaning to the art form, and it is all based on intuition without the primordial form of knowledge. You can also see this from the perspective of the artist, where the artist doesn’t have any concepts, but has an intuition and uses his art as his or her way of expression. There are ideas and concepts of the art, but there is no primordial form, and this is what art is by Croce. Croce also believes poetry as art and this intuition might be the beginning trace of origins for contemporary poetry. I think you can connect the idea of order vs. chaos in this definition of art. When art is a pure expression or intuition it gives it order because expression and intuition there is some understanding and intention behind it, however, the lack of primordial knowledge is similar to the idea of chaos where there is no understanding of where, how, and why this intuition or expression came to be.

Another significant point discussed in the lecture is the notion of relating voice, poetry, language, and body. Colangelo mentions that the multilingual poet, Paul Celan, says “poetry is timeless, and poetry can be an empty space. It doesn’t always have to be fully understood; it can be just left empty.” These components of poetry are crucial to discover some evidence to origins of poetry. However, it is also the reason I think why finding origins of poetry difficult. If poetry is timeless than it becomes more challenging to pinpoint when poetry has started because any literature with verses can become poetry from any time, but also most origins share the same characteristics of being timeless, such as origins of the universe there is no definite time when the universe started. Leaving poetry vague and incomprehensible also shares similar characteristics with the origins of universe and art. We also don’t fully understand why the universe was created and trace the origins of art. It is challenging to find origins of universe and art. For art, it is mainly due to defining what qualifies as art that makes tracing origins of art difficult, and for origins of the universe, we are not technologically and scientifically able to trace our universe at the beginning of time.

Optimism in Innovation

On October 24th lecturer professor Vittorio Loreto came to lecture about innovation. Loreto talked about how to calculate the rate of innovation. Loreto’s thoughts on innovation was that the rate of innovation was decreasing and that only reason why innovation is increasing today, is that today, many more people are trying to innovate. By Loreto’s research most people try to innovate by trying to predict the future, and most analyze historical data to predict the future like analyzing past weather patterns in trying to predict tomorrow’s weather. Loreto believes predicting patterns in this way is inaccurate and this is one of the reasons why he believes that the rate of innovation is decreasing. He uses examples of tech companies like Wikipedia, Twitter, Last.fm, and Github and that the innovation rate is decreasing. Loreto says that innovation is getting tougher because successful patents are getting increasingly prevalent, which in turn achieving monetary return more difficult. Loreto believes that competition is increasing, which is increasing innovation today but the rate of change in innovation is decreasing.

 

Loreto’s arguments can be disputed that tech companies like Twitter, Wikipedia, Last.fm, and GitHub have been all old established companies. One cannot expect the rate of innovation and growth for these companies to have similar growth rates during the earlier days of the companies. As companies mature their rate of growth decreases because they fully capture their market share. As the rate for growth for these companies decreases and becomes a mature company their innovation might be affected depending on their investment in R&D (research and development). Most mature companies want to please their investors, so they look to spend less on R&D and look to increase their EBITDA for short term gains. Therefore, reducing innovation for mature companies, however the increasing competition within these tech companies is what drives innovation and the tech companies looking to increase their earnings before innovation dies out. If we trace the innovations that happened in our lifetime, we see an extraordinary progress made in people’s standard of living which can be directly related to innovation and our economy. The DJIA was about 81 a century ago, and now it’s around 23,500 today and at the current rate it could reach to be over a 1 million in another century from now. U.S.’s GDP per capita more than quadrupled between 1941 and 2017. You don’t need to be an economist to see that the world is innovating. In America alone we see 75 million home owners, 260 million vehicles, hyper productive factories, smart phones, electric cars, and artificial intelligence all net gains for America starting out around 241 years ago from a land of nothingness. U.S. has amassed a wealth totaling 90 trillion dollars. I am using past data to predict future growth and innovation, which Loreto seems to disagree with.  However, it seems that I, and along with many investors, have been right when we predict the future growth of America’s economy will increase with using historical data of U.S. economy.

 

However, this is not only in America, but technological innovation has brought globalization which uplifted people in low-income classes all over the world dramatically in the last 20 to 30 years.  The rate of innovation in our lifetime we see that we went from very small number of people who had access to information, now we have virtually everyone having access to world’s information in their own language, and made more convenient by devices such as our tablets, smartphones, and etc.. The strongest argument can be made with Moore’s Law that there is growth in innovation. Moore’s Law states that our transistor densities doubles every two years, which means that price performance of our technology is improving by factor of 10 to 20 which is phenomenal. Not only are transistors getting better, but our fiber optics, semi-conductors, storage, and etc.. all integral part of today’s technology is improving dramatically every day and year after year. The world only recently witness an artificial intelligent computer program, AlphaGo beat the Korean go champion Lee Se Dol. This phenomenon itself is a proof that world is only getting better and innovation is continuing.

 

It seems very optimisitic that our world is continually innovating and the getting better. People’s lives today are so much better in terms of compared to people even 50 years ago. The innovation and economic growth led to a creation of very promising and successful world. It seems in the lecture Loreto doesn’t seem to connect how origins, chaos or order has anything to do with innovation or novelties, but nevertheless I’m confident that the world will continually find growth in innovation in the future.

Colby Art Museum (Origins)

On Tuesday we toured the Colby College Museum of Art looking at artworks that had connections to the theme of Origins. Our guide Shalini Le Gall first talked about the Origins of art, more specifically visual art, she mentions that it is difficult to determine a specific time of the origins of art since art includes not only drawings and paintings, but also objects. Le Gall notes that many of the collections in the museum were from Maine and predominantly American art. Since there are many types of art, Shalini Le Gall, mentions it might be easier to examine the origins of abstract art or Avant-garde art.

We were asked to walk around the museum and look at some artwork. The most alluring art piece to me was the artwork called the “Wall of Lamentation XIII” by Santiago Montoya. The aesthetic appeal to this artwork was in the carefully folded rows of multiple international currencies that was cased in a stainless steel frame. Le Gall mentions that the artist intention of the artwork was to display that money was the cause of the dictatorial regimes that occurred in the countries of the currencies. Nations like DPRK, Soviet Union, Vietnam, and Uzbekistan had or still has dictator regimes where people live in fear, starvation, and lack of necessities. She mentions the artist was trying to say that money was the root of all evil and unethical behaviors. Le Gall also makes a connection to how the artist is a hypocrite because the artist, himself, is trying to sell his art for financial gains meanwhile criticizing the unethical motivation behind money and the art market.

Although I agree with the statement that Montoya tries to make with his artwork, I think there is more meaning to the artwork than saying that money is the root of all evil. Montoya’s artwork also gives meaning to the global economy and the financial system today. The endless amounts of paper bills folded in rows deliver a sense of astonishment but also uneasiness. The artwork reflected how extensive and interconnected the economy is because of globalization. Today the foreign exchange market is the largest market regarding trading volume, and the forex market affects almost all countries’ economy. The foreign exchange market has been known to be the closest example of perfect competition, however, because of the few that holds control over these financial markets, which are usually large international banks, the financial system is also fragile. The collapse of the financial system is just as dangerous as, if not more, than autocratic regimes. One country’s economy collapses this will affect other countries’ economy as well because of the world’s globalized financial system. Unlike autocratic regimes, the problem does not only pertain to the citizens of that country, but the crash of the global economy will affect billions of people all over the world. Therefore, it is imperative as we become a more global society that we have the right regulations in place, appropriate entities and agents to administer these regulations, and innovative financial institutions to pave new ways.

Artes Liberales

At the beginning of the lecture, Aaron Hanlon talks about the how the Colby campus is compartmentalized and separated into buildings that have each own concentration for areas of study. Some may say this separation of buildings may isolate and narrow the perspective of liberal arts students who will be forced to concentrate in only one area of study. However, I believe that assigning the buildings with a different concentration in an area of study is just a logistical convenience for professors and students who usually have to work together or need special labs for that area of study. Professor Hanlon also mentioned that the liberal arts that we know, today is different from medieval times. In medieval European universities, there were seven areas of study under liberal arts which were grammar, rhetoric, logic, geometry, music, arithmetic, and astronomy. In Latin liberal arts translates to “artes liberales” which means worthy of a free person and these skills and academic study is believed in medieval Europe to be essential for a person to participates in debates, defending oneself in court, serving on juries, be part of electoral politics, and serve in the military. Hanlon also believes that the arts, natural sciences, and humanities should all belong together and also mentions about how liberal arts graduates should get decent jobs after college.

 

Many believe liberal arts degree will grant mid to high paying jobs after college. However, this is far from the truth. It is true that unemployment rate is on the decline. However, there is underemployment among college graduates. Liberal-arts major students have hard times to find lucrative jobs while students who focus on science, engineering, tech, and math fields are finding highly lucrative jobs after they graduate. Since 2010, after the Great Recession, the U.S. economy added millions of jobs and wages have increased for almost every demographic. However, underemployment has not changed after 2010, and also, the labor market is filled with more jobs that do not require a college degree. It seems that humanities majors and liberal arts majors seem to be getting these jobs. Underemployment affects more than fifty percent of majors in performing arts, art history, communications, political science, sociology, philosophy, and international affairs.

 

The fact why underemployment is more frequent to liberal arts majors raises the question on whether the demand for liberal-arts students is declining? Or are high achievement students choosing engineering, science, tech, and mathematics as majors? These are questions we need to test to see why liberal arts majors are underemployed. I think liberal arts graduates should have lucrative jobs since liberal arts graduates are inclined to think more holistically they can be applied to different areas of study. It is similar to the Royal Society in a sense because it was founded for the improvement of natural knowledge and defined by an interest in experimental science. The Royal society gathered great scientists, artists, and engineers together to improve science, innovate, and foster a global cooperation in experimental science. The Royal Society shared similar goals of liberal arts which were to create a free and well-rounded person who was able to think and contribute in all areas of study. It is perplexing on why the labor market does not have a higher demand for liberal arts majors.

Origins of Earth

From David Bercovici’s lecture, it is clear that Earth is not an ordinary planet. It is the only planet that mankind knows of that can support intelligent life. Earth is the only terrestrial planet with water and a habitable climate. The chance of having life itself in a planet is extremely low numerous dynamic variables play into when looking at life on other planets. The specific conditions that are required for a planet to support life and to become habitable are impressive, and it allows people to understand how slim the probability was for origins of mankind to have started on Earth.

 

Bercovici first explains how our universe started from the Big Bang and how our solar system was created. The planetary clouds collapsed and formed stars. Our star, the sun, is also unique in a sense that since it is a small star. All stars use hydrogen fusion to use energy, and since our sun is a small star, it burns longer than other giant stars. These giant stars undergo hydrogen fusion but when it runs out of elements to burn through it goes into Supernova. This explosion of the star leaves all the elements that makeup in the world. Elements like carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, phosphate, magnesium, iron, silicon, etc.… all these elements are building blocks of life and helped create Earth.

 

Earth, when compared to other terrestrial planets in our solar system, like Venus and Mars is the only planet that has habitable climate and water. These two features are essential for life, and so far we have not found any planets with a habitable climate, but some planets and moons that have had water in the past solid and liquid. Earth is also unique because it has plate tectonics which other planets do not have. Earth uses plate tectonics to regulate its climate. The two planets most like Earth is Venus and Mars, Venus is too hot for life to exist and Mars is too cold for life to exist. Earth has just the right temperature for life to exist.

 

If we want to look at life and where it came from and how other planets can support life, we should look no other planet than Earth, and for the time being, Earth is the only planet that we know of that can support life. However, the probability of having all the right conditions for a habitable planet to exist is so low it makes us wonder if our origin was just dumb luck or are their other planets out in the universe with the same or similar conditions that have intelligent life.

 

The unlikeliness of mankind to exist should give a different perspective of origins of our universe. Beating the odds to have existed as a human on Earth should be looked as being very fortunate. Origins of Earth helps us understand how we came to be as mankind and should be viewed as a flexible guiding blueprint in search of other life in other habitable planets and how other origins are formed to be in the future.

Newer posts »