Big things are happening today, a question is being asked. It's cray over at the McClure household, so I'm gonna take a FREEBIE!
P.S.
The question starts with "Will you" and ends with "Marry me"
My Sister is involved so is her boyfriend.
Sunday, November 16, 2014
Sunday, October 26, 2014
Limited Visibility
| 89 Huicholes, 2006, By Santiago Sierra. 84 black and white portraits. |
Initial Response:
Limited
Visibility is an exhibit that emphasizes the effect and meaning behind
intentional erasure and omission. The manifestation of these absences varies in
each work, and the purpose behind the omission has different intended effects
on the viewer. The Curator’s
statement explained this exhibit’s
impact: “Seer, seen, and unseen come together here to evoke the haunted
sensation of searching and looking.” With the curator’s introduction as a guideline for my
thoughts, I was able to search for the omission of each piece, and ponder the
significance of absence.
Each
work’s omission gave me
unique feelings. 97 Housemaids, by Daniela
Ortiz, showed pictures collected from Facebook that centered on upper-class
Peruvian families. The maids and workers were cut out or in the background. Though
not intentional, the pictures depicted a heart-wrenching truth about the
relationships between different social classes. Other works were less
straightforward and required personal interpretation. A site-specific piece, Unfolded Architecture by Pablo Rasgado,
showed a square of deconstruction. The omission of the sheetrock and plywood
didn’t have a clear message,
but it stirred in me a feeling of loss and impermanence. But perhaps the
destruction of the old is necessary for the advent of the new. Other pieces had
absent ideas, like the missing labor in Allora & Calzadilla’s sandpaper composition. This could
represent a seeming disregard for the months of work the sandpaper was used
for. Each piece had a unique message and a clear theme. “Limited Visibility” was
a straightforward, but at times challenging concept. As an art novice, I was
excited and surprised by the ideas I gleaned from things that were missing.
Visual Analysis:
The
piece that I have chosen to analyze is a collection of 84 black and white
photographs by Santiago Sierra. It is called 89 Huicholes, and was made in 2006. Santiago is an artist from
Spain, and many of his works express some sort of message for social change. In
this piece, Santiago has compiled 84 portraits of members of the Huicholes
tribe. These photographs, however, defy the conventional portrait form. The
members of the tribe all have their backs to us. We can see the occasional
neck, headdress, and hair, but their faces are hidden. Most portraits emphasize
the face as the defining feature to be depicted, but Santiago views the back,
or omission of the face as a significant representation of the individuals.
These portraits are all similar, most with only one subject, but a few with an
unseen mother and child. They are all depicted in black and white. This lack of
color works to draw the attention to minute differences between each picture.
Without distracting colors, the viewer is not overwhelmed by the display, and
is able to analyze each individual. Each picture is in portrait orientation,
and they are organized into 5 rows. The four top rows each have 17 pictures,
but the bottom most row has only 16; there is an empty space in the bottom
right corner. This is another example of purposeful omission, in line with the
theme of the exhibit.
In
a society that highly values image and exposure, this piece is a culture shock.
Viewing pictures that purposely omit the face is surprising, and extremely
impactful. Even as we perused the exhibit, phones were out, pictures were being
snapped and instantly posted. To look in on the starkly contrasting culture of
the Huicholes is humbling. One of the last tribes in North America who still
practice their pre-Columbian traditions, the Huicholes are constantly fighting
against the government and farmers to maintain their religious practices and
ancestral land rights. By having their backs to the viewer, this piece invokes
a sense of guilt. Perhaps this is the only thing we ever see of the Huicholes,
we live in ignorance of their existence. Could these pictures represent the
highest level of exposure that their conditions and culture will ever receive?
Even
from behind, we can see that the subject of each portrait has a unique
personality and attributes. This is seen in the way they choose to organize
their hair, headdresses, and clothes. Their body position may indicate their
psychological or physical condition. The viewer is forced to utilize what they
are given to form a complete picture of the individual. Santiago describes
this: "The person has to create what the person doesn't see". The
viewer is not spoon-fed the picture, they instead must actively pursue the
image of the individual. Without the face of the subjects being shown, only so
much can be assumed about them. Although the viewer is keenly aware of the
subject's individuality, they can't truly know the person from the light that
has been captured and displayed. This may represent the tragedy of the
unnoticed, unseen. There are people around the world that are unique, special,
in need of help, but never noticed. They are never given the opportunity to
communicate, be seen, and shown. The Huicholes are in this condition, and
Santiago displays this in 89 Huicholes.
We need to notice those being oppressed and silenced. We should take a break
from absorbing the publicized, and instead actively pursue the things not being
shown. By seeking out those whose backs are turned, we can have a positive
impact on their lives. By changing our mentality, perhaps we can alter the
culture to pursue engagement and active pursuit; as opposed to inactively
viewing the things we are shown.
The
empty space in the bottom right corner of this work is another purposeful
omission by Santiago. This space is perhaps meant to be filled by the people
the viewer knows that are ignored. Individuals or cultures that are bypassed
and oppressed, or maybe even the viewer him/herself feels that they would fit
in this space. The empty space allows the message of the work to go beyond just
the Huicholes. This ignored identity is seen around the world; the oppression
of the Huicholes is an example of this universal principle. As I viewed this
piece, I thought of the people I ignore and dismiss, and even those who I have
never met or heard of, and I added them to this gap.
Saturday, October 18, 2014
Pride in Advertising
![]() |
| Buik Reatta advertisement, published in Sports Illustrated, June 13th. 1988 |
Denotation:
This
advertisement from General Motors is promoting a Buick Reatta car. The car
itself is bright red, gleaming, and highly glossed. With a black racing stripe
down the center, aerodynamic design, and two doors, it seems like a sports car.
It stands in stark contrast to the black background it is framed in. Above the
car are the words “Go Ahead. You deserve it.” These are prominently displayed
in all capital letters, in a bold font at the top of the advertisement. Below
the car are the “specs” of the model. These are titled by the name of the car,
“Reatta”, written in a sleek, smooth font. The details of the car itself and
the short note to the audience of the advertisement are written in bright red
letters, matching the car. The details of the car’s attributes are presented in
a bulleted list, and are framed by flattering messages to the audience at the
beginning and end. Underneath the specks is the company name, Buick, written in
bold, red letters as well. Below this is a company slogan and logo, red to
match the rest of the ad.
Connotation:
This
advertisement appeals to the deadly sin of pride. The first words seen justify
self-indulgence: “Go ahead. You deserve it”. At the top of the ad, they are prominent and
bolded; hard to miss. The advertisers use these words to frame the car
underneath as a tempting treat to be taken. The car itself is sporty, sleek,
and attractive, but largely impractical. The advertisement acknowledges the flash
and impracticality of the car, but by elevating the self-concept of the
audience, the audience feels validated in buying the Reatta. The font of the
car name, “Reatta” is smooth and sleek. This reinforces and emphasizes the
sporty nature of the car. The main text of the advertisement works to persuade
the audience that they deserve this car. The first line appeals directly to
their pride: “Like many people of achievement”. It goes on to tell the audience
that they have passed up on many pleasures in life to get to where they are
now. “If so, this is your time- and Reatta is your car”. After describing the
viewer as a successful, self-sacrificing person, they tell the audience to
reward themselves for their excellence. The bulleted list following this outlines
the attributes of the car. It describes a Buick that is worthy of a deserving
driver. Throughout the text and in the slogan at the end, “American” is
carefully placed. A patriotic, high-achieving, and motivated person like
yourself deserves this fantastic car.
Audience:
Published
in a Sports Illustrated magazine in 1988, this ad’s target market was likely
middle-aged, upper-middle class, American men. This demographic is often
searching for something to do with their extra time and money. Eric Erikson
describes this pivotal period in his stages of psychological development. He
asserts that during this period, people begin to use their leisure time
creatively, and reinvent their roles in society. The advertisers are catering
to this psychographic: “You’ve probably postponed some of life’s special pleasures
on your way to where you are. If so, this is your time.” They are offering them
an appealing way to spend their newly freed up money and time. The audience of
this ad is likely familiar with advertisements that appeal to the functionality
and practicality of products. They are mature enough to see through many
tactics used to disguise products as useful and practical. Consequently, the
advertisers are openly presenting the car as a luxury vehicle. Though not
necescarilly functional, it is something the viewer deserves.
Saturday, October 4, 2014
Charlotte Bronte and Jane Eyre
![]() |
| Jane Eyre Dress Rehearsal- Act 1, Hessle Theatre Company, taken by John Drury |
"Such
is the imperfect nature of man! Such spots are there on the disc of the
clearest planet; and eyes like Miss Scatcherd's can only see those minute
defects, and are blind to the full brightness of the orb," (Bronte 62).
By focusing on remedying the
imperfect nature of man, the teachers of Lowood at the command of Mr.
Brocklehurst spend all their days picking apart the sinful actions of their
students. Trying to punish for imperfection, they are forever focused on the
bad, however minuscule, and the miss the value of the individual. The central
idea Bronte is trying to communicate in this passage is that cruel treatment,
even when justified by religion, can be extensively damaging for individuals.
The injustsice of Brocklehurst's treatment of the girls is seen in the
extremity of their conditions and punishments, the disparity between the girls’
conditions and the conditions of Brocklehurst's wife and daughters, and
Brocklehurst's lack of forgiveness.
"I have a Master to serve
whose kingdom is not of this world: my mission is to mortify in these girls the
lusts of the flesh; to teach them to clothe themselves with shame-facedness and
sobriety," (Bronte 59). Brocklehurst's aim is righteous upon initial
inspection. However, the way in which he goes about this involves cruel and
vicious tactics. Bronte recounts the awful treatment of the girls in the first
few paragraphs. They are given minimal clothes to shield from the cold, barely
enough food to survive, and are punished cruelly. These methods are meant to starve
the body but feed the soul, but they instead result in the starvation of these
girls physically and emotionally, and probably the rejection of any God who
would allow such treatment.
The true hypocrisy of
Brocklehurst's mentality is exposed when his wife and daughters are introduced.
While Brocklehurst is explaining to Miss Temple the shameful extravagance of
the girls braided hair, Brocklehust's family interrupts. Three ladies walk in,
wearing expensive curls, embroidered gowns, and rare furs. By introducing this
situational irony, Bronte is able to comment on the hypocrisy of Brocklehurst
and the horrible disparity between religious idealism and the true actions of
many practitioners. The stark contrast between these two conditions reaffirms
the horror of the conditions in Lowood.
Though Brocklehurst claims to
follow the tenants of Christianity, his practices are directly opposed to the
purpose of Christianity. His lack of forgiveness towards Jane or any of the
students shows his ignorance in true Biblical mercy. "For it is by grace
you have been saved, through faith-- and this is not from yourselves, it is the
gift of God--" (Ephesians 2:8). In the fundamental Christianity by which I
have been raised, it is essential that this verse is realised in everyday life.
Brocklehurst's attempt to reprimand and fix the girls in order for them to
achieve salvation is in direct opposition with this verse. As he strives to
right all their wrongs, with no forgiveness, he misses that grace and salvation
come from Christ alone.
Brocklehurst and Lowood's
teachers are forever focused on the imperfection of Jane and her peers. Instead
of depending on the salvation offered by the grace of God, they strive to earn
salvation for the girls by making them live righteously. Bronte points out the
horror of Brocklehurst's treatment, which seems to be justified by
Christianity. Focusing on the sins of man will forever focus attention on what
is wrong, without recognizing and utilizing all the things that are right.
Works Cited
Bronte, Charlotte. Jane Eyre.
London: J. M. Dent & sons Limited, 1908. Print.
Drury, John. "Jane Eyre Dress Rehearsal- Act 1." Hessle Theatre Company. N.p., n.d. Web.
4 Oct. 2014. <http://www.hessletheatre.co.uk/Productions/JaneEyre2011/JaneEyreDressRehearsalAct1.htm>.
Sunday, September 21, 2014
What's in a Name?
Avery,
in French, means "King of the Elves". This definition is always a
quality icebreaker when interacting with new people.
"This
weather is great!"
"Well,
my name means 'King of the Elves', and the weather IS great!"

There are plenty of
interpretations of this definition. It could either mean I am Elrond, head chef
of the Keebler elves, or even Santa himself! However, this French meaning is no
more than a fun conversation piece. My actual name represents me as an individual,
and it is an important part of my identity. The name Avery is relatively
unique. My parents stumbled upon it when perusing a baby name book. My brother
is named Bradley, My sister Haley, my Mom Cindy, and My Dad is named Andy. With
all these "Y's" my name couldn't be something like Bob, it would
throw off the rhythm. So they settled on Avery. Throughout my life, my name
hasn't defined me; I like to think that I have defined my name. Hopefully my
actions and attributes have made people think fondly of the name Avery.
My first name represents me as
an individual; the things I have done and the person I am. My last name,
however, represents me as a part of a family unit. While my first name has been
mine to define and identify, the meaning of my last name is beyond my control.
When people think of me as a McClure, for better or for worse, they assume
things about my character and personality. They associate me with the rest of
my family and the things those individuals have done. I am fortunate to have a
family who is largely beyond reproach. When people hear I am a McClure, their
demeanor brightens. Hopefully, as they get to know me as an individual, they
will continue to smile when they hear the name, "Avery McClure".
Humans have the option to
associate themselves with any person or group, or to simply act as an
individual. However, people are not always given the choice; one can be grouped
against one's will. This sort of grouping, or stereotyping, occurs when one
attribute of an individual connects them to a group, and then other attributes
are assumed of the person based on their grouping. Although I am not aware of
ever being subjected to unwanted stereotyping, there have been times when
things have been assumed of me as an individual because of the group I am
associated with. One example is my participation in the IB program. Taking a
few non-IB classes this year, I have the chance to interact with AP students.
Before the student gets to know me as an individual, they assume I have certain
characteristics. They think I am pretentious, prideful, and condescending.
Though this may be true, it makes it difficult to be thought of as anything
else.
Being associated with a larger
whole, not only are characteristics assumed of individuals, but so are actions.
This is seen in the constant discussion of when the United States should
intervene in international conflicts. In the recent E. Bola outbreak, people
have been pushing the United States to respond. It is expected that a
government with the means to help should. However, there is an expectation that
the U.S. protects its citizens first and foremost. At what point can
individuals in government detach themselves from being identified with the
United States and instead act on their impulses as a part of humanity?
Saturday, September 6, 2014
We are the Other
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)



