Disconnected Urbanism Summary

   In many examples of science fiction based lore, a common thread in some plots includes the idea that humanity creates new pieces of technology that eventually begin to rise up from their creators and conquer the world. The idea that humanity will create something that we cannot control, which will lead to our downfall, is a scary real possibility in this new age of discovery and innovation. To many, this seems like a pike dream that will never happen in our life time; but to  Paul Goldberger author of "Disconnected Urbanism" the first assult has already been initaded by the machines, and it's probably sitting right next to you.

   Yes, I'm talking about your handy, little cellphone; that piece of plastic that seems to control all the aspects of your social lifestyle. Consider this, how much time do you think is eaten up by spending it on your cell phone in one day? Now multiply that general number for the amount of days in a year; thats alot of potential time spent with family of meeting new people in your community gone right? Thats the arguement that Goldberger is trying to make us to understand; that people are simply spending too much time on their phones worrying about trivial details and "he said she said," when they should be concerned about what is happening around them. We've let the public places of the cities and subards become our own little backyard as we text or chat our way to our next destination; what ever happened to the days of random bumping into a long lost friend and catching up on old times over a cup of coffee? Now adays we simply have to "poke" them on Facebook to get an update on how their dog is sooo cute or some other meaningless information.

   Goldberger is trying to tell us that by relying so heavily on technology, we have effectively handicapped ourselves in our ability to socialize without technology as a cruch. They say that wars always begin with words, followed by action; whose to say that the next "LOL THATS SO FUNNY!!!" text will herald the end of days for humanity. It's a long and mostly improbable situation, but for good karma sake lets follow Goldberger's advice and turn the phones off people.

A Child In the Technological Era

   Technology, it is a simple word that can take on a number of different meanings. It is a never ending road of discovery and innovation that affects ever aspect of our normal life in our modern civilization. Look at the everyday things you use everyday: cell phones to keep in constant communication with family and friends from a dozen, hundred or even thousand miles away, electricity to give light and power, computers to research and store whatever data we find necessary, and many other examples. But is there a downside to all this rapid technological expansion; my question is what is now happening to the children being brought up in this new age of technology and interconnection?

   Most of my generation was born right at the start of the rise of the internet, a time where the interconnection of people through a computer screen was just becoming a serious reality. So to an extent, we have had the most time to allow this new form of communication to influence us. In my opinion I have mixed feelings on how beneficial this new system of communication is. It helps with saying in contact with old friends who live in far away places, keeping me update on my social plans, and allows me to find information on anything at a given moment. But one of the downsides that I can see is that some people can no longer communicate to others without the help of an electronic. These individuals become nervous and timid around others simply because they have not learned the proper way to carry on a prolonged discussion or learned how to relate to others. Social anxiety levels are on the rise in this country, so much so that now there are special programs you can attend to learn proper "socialization" techniques.

   Given, not everyone who uses a computer will become a paranoid, antisocial shut-in, but the fact that the number of these people, who have this social disorder, is rising is a major matter of concern. People need to learn to not rely of such a false sense of friendship and interact with others in your local community. 

3rd Cover Analysis

  It's no surprise that as a people, New Yorkers are often times held in both high regards and deep resentment compared to the rest of our nation. Some love us because of our close association to the financial security of our nation's future, our many contributions to the sciences, and our cultural accomplishment towards the arts and theater. On the downside, New Yorkers have rapidly gained a reputation for being a bully towards thoses who don't follow our example of rapid progress; it's not that we try to live up to this stereotype, but we're living in a city that never forgets, never takes the easy way out, and never stops moving forward even for a day. Past and present collide, old world meets the modern age, and in this city where traditions and innovations mix, we need a piece of literature that can soothe our fast paced tastes, while reminding us of our history. The New Yorker is the answer to that hunger for a familiar face, but with a cutting edge attitude; in David Hockneys' cover painting of "Shoes,"this can be most accurately described for his new interpretation on an old talent. 

   David Hockney has been a well known and respected artist in painting for the past 50 years; Hockney is so well known and talented that he has won several prestigious awards by the artistic community and has sold many of his greater works for hundreds of thousands of dollars. Always looking to improve upon his work and explore new alternatives, Hockney began to experiment using the new "Brushes" App on his IPad. This was mostly a hobby for him in his spare time inbetween his main projects, but what Hockney soon  discovered was the inspirational and technological breakthrough he was looking for to boost his creative drive; this was a new system to experiment with, a way to create art out of thin air and send to thousands of people instantaneously for an opinion. Hockney was soon able to create numerous paintings, sketchings, and doodles on his new found "artistic playground;" his art was so revolutionary and creative that the late Steve Jobs even commissioned Hockney to continue advertising his paintings using Apple products. But some traditionalists could not fathom that such a highly respectable and prestigious artist would lower himself to relying on technology instead of a brush and paper to express his emotions. Some more traditional artists deemed his art a heresy and even went so far as to refuse to recognize his creative as nothing more than "scribbles on a computer."

   What Hockney has done with his new style of artisit expression is to simply live up to the New York way of life, adapt to the new and blend with the old; a necessary skill in my eye for any healthy culture. Originally, I viewed "Shoes" exactly as it was printed on paper: a rather simple looking picture of a pair of black and brown dress shoes placed next to a rather colorful wall. At first, I was puzzled as to why this simple piece of computer art was so inspirational that it made the front cover of such an artistically prone magizine like the "New Yorker." His other more famous creations using the IPad also included rather simplistic focus pieces: for example, in the case of "Still Life Flowers" a pot of bright purple flowers or in "Landscapes" a simple multicolored sunset over looking a bay. By using these rather traditional subjects, I saw a pattern that Hockney was (either intentionally or accidentally ) trying to express to the viewer. That Hockney wasn't trying to use his art to promote the idea that technology was trying to replace the old values held by the artistic community today, but that by combinding technology and art together we can create beautiful masterpieces that would otherwises be locked in our minds forever. The idea I most clearly see being interpreted is that using new technology is the only way to expand upon our ideas of artistic creativity.  It's the perfect representation on how New Yorkers are able to keep the old, but use new and better innovations to help better ourselves.

   At first, I had serious doubts about what topics and ideas I could express about my cover. It looked so simple and unimportant; but as I dug deeper into this paintings back-story and the politics surrounding this "unimportant computer scribble," I grew to form my own unique opinion about this representation of the New York lifestyle. Maybe that's the point Hockney was originally trying to express? That a person's first negative opinion is nothing more than an instinctive reaction to express our fears in something new and unfamiliar. All this negativity is just on the surface, however; apparently, you just need to do is dig alittle deeper then the surface appearence to discover a new ideas true value and importance towards humanity.

2nd Cover Analysis

   It's no surprise that as a people, New Yorkers are often times held in both high regards and deep resentment compared to the rest of our nation. Some love us because of our close association to the financial security of our nation's future, our many contributions to the sciences, and our cultural accomplishment towards the arts and theater. On the downside, we have a reputation for being a bully towards states who don't follow our model; it's almost like if New York is the ringleader in a teenage click and passes judgment on those who follow a different path. But for me, New York is great because of our ability to keep what as made us great in the past and tie it together with the new. This state is best defined by the people who live, work, and breath it every day, and David Hockneys' cover painting of "Shoes" for the New Yorker collectively shows a progressive state looking forward to the future with a connection to our history.

   David Hockney is a well known and respected artist in painting, so much so that he has won several prestigious awards by the art community and has sold paintings for hundreds of thousands of dollars. Always looking to improve upon his work and explore new alternatives, Hockney began to experiment using the new "Brushes" App on his IPad. What Hockney discovered was the inspirational and technological breakthrough he was looking for; this was a new system to experiment with, a way to create art out of thin air and send to thousands of people instantaneously for an opinion. Hockney soon created numerous paintings, sketchings, and doodles to try out his new found "artistic playground;" his art was so revolutionary and creative that the late Steve Jobs even commissioned Hockney to continue advertising his paintings using the Apple product. But some traditionalists could not fathom that such a highly respectable and prestigious artist would lower himself to relying on technology instead of a brush and paper to express his emotions. Some more traditional artists deemed his art a heresy and even went so far as to refuse to recognize his creative as nothing more than "scribbles on a computer." My answer to them is this: were cavemen first criticized for drawing on walls by their peers? What about the first human to convey poetry onto paper instead of passing it on through oral communication, was he denounced and mocked also?

   It is human nature to be afraid of the unknown and strange, it's how our ancestors learned to fear the predators that their cavestep and avoid the creepy-crawlies hiding in the dark. But what Hockney has done is simply live up to the New York way of life, adapt to the new and blend with the old; a necessary representation in my eye for any healthy culture. Did we stop the "Times Square New Year's Eve Ball-Drop" just because we moved into a new century, or did we close down "The New York Stock Exchange" after the market tanked? The answer is most definitely no; we researched our mistakes, educated ourselves to prevent another collapse, and kept moving forward with our heads held high and our eyes towards the future! Hockney may have kept his style to simple everyday objects, but either intentionally or by accident his art can be used to represent the complex issues in society today. The issue that I see most clearly being interpreted is that by using the next new technological is the only way to learn and better ourselves and expand upon our own creativity. For me, it's the perfect representation that New Yorkers are able to keep the old, but use the new to better ourselves.

   At first, I had serious doubts about what topics and ideas I could express about my cover. It looked so simple and unimportant, but as I dug deeper into this paintings back-story and the politics surrounding it I grew to form my own unique opinion about this representation of the New York lifestyle. Maybe that's the point Hockney was originally trying to express? That we're not a state filled with the stereotypes of crocked cops, loudmouth businessmen, and corrupt politicians; but that all this negativity is on the surface. You just need to dig alittle deeper to discover its true value and uncover the past.

1st of Cover Analysis

   It's no surprise that as a people, New Yorkers is often times held in both high regards and deep resentment compared to other areas in our nation. Some love us because of our close association to the financial security to our nation's future, our many contributions to the sciences that have come out of our brightest minds, and our cultural accomplishment towards the arts, theator, and the beauty of our monuments. On the downside, we have a reputation for bigotry against states with a different view, the overcrowding of our cities, and the reputation for letting money come first over family and friends. For me, this state is best defined by David Hockneys' painting of "Shoes" as a progresssive state looking forward to the future with a connection to our history.
  
   David Hockney is a well known and repected artist in painting, so much so that he as won several prestigious awards by the art community and has sold paintings for hundreds of thousands of dollars. So it was deemed a heresy by some of the more classical members of the art community that his cover work for the "New Yorker" was created using Apples Inc. "Brushes" App; they could not fathom that such a highly respectable and prestigious artist would lower himself to relying on technology instead of a brush and paper. My answer to them is this: were cavemen first critizied for drawing on walls by their peers? What about the first human to convey poetry onto paper instead of passing it on through oral communication?

   It is human nature to be afraid of the unknown and strange, it's how our ancestors learned to fear the predators that their cavestep and avoid the creepy-crawlies hiding in the dark. But what Hockney has done is simply live up the the New York way of life, adapt to the new and blend with the old. Hockney kept his simple style of everyday objects to represent meaning to complex issues, but used the next new technological leap to expand upon his creativity. For me, it's a representation that New Yorkers are able to keep the old, but use the new to better ourselves.

   At first, I had serious doubts about what topics and ideas I could express about my cover. It looked so simple and unimportant, but as I dug deeper into this paintings backstory and the politics surrounding it, I grew to form my own unique opinion about this representation of the New York lifestyle. Maybe that's the point Hockney was originally trying to express? That we're not a state filled with the stereotypes of crocked cops, loudmouth businessmen, and corrupt politicians; but that all this negativity is on the surface. You just need to dig alittle deeper to discover it's true value.

New Yorker Cover Midterm

   It is no big shock that we, as a nation united, are in major trouble. The recession of 2007 is still taking it's horrible toil on our economy, our position as a global superpower, and perhaps most importantly this financial catastrophe has shaken the common man's trust in the government/stock market to his/her core. The stock market is at the forefront of every major finacial decision we now have to make, like a Old Testament prophet commanding the common man to embrace a new deity for the sake of salvation. But when the prophet can't deliver the promises made, the people become furious that they have been taken advantage of in such a way and seek revenge; it's no different today, except that it's alittle harder to stone corporate to death.

   In this New Yorker cover art, we can see that the artist is most definatly trying to show the evils of the corporate side to New York. The smoke and haze gives a feeling of ominous malice, while the smooth, sleek sides with little color gives a cold, unfeeling look to the tall skyscrapers. Poking up through the smog below are exhaust towers and in my opinion, they represent the little power that the common laborer has among the wealthy and powerful. The proud CEOs and businessmen sit above in the choking, confusing fog the common man stumbles around in simply trying to make sense of what is happening in the world above their heads and paygrade. Sitting atop the second highest building is a structure made to represent the US treasury department and it is feeding fuel to the factories below. It shows that money is tied in directly to the final skyscraper. It is the massive, looming centerpiece in the cover; a mighty bull sitting atop a the largest building staring almost proudly above his kingdom of the corrupt and corporate. Much like the Golden Calf built by the Israelites, this idol (coincidentally the bull is also a logo for one of the major banks in business today "Bank of America") is shown to have complete control over the lifes of the wealthy even to the point that a massive temple is built to prove it's power over them; effectively we have done this by worshipping the modern market so and effectively declaring it a god in the process.

   When the common man lost his money in the financial collapse, they were in a panic and begged the government for help in securing their jobs and money. And so, putting the people's best interest at mind the government began to bailout the large companies to hopefully stabilize the rapidly growing black hole of our national debt. But after weeks turned to months and months turned to years, the economy was still in the tank and the people wondered where had all their money gone? The answer was financial corruption and misuse in the mess that was corporate America; as more facts of large bonuses and payoffs surfaced, many grew from a furious standpoint to one of action. Recently, the occupy Wall Street Movement has been growing in strength and support as more and more people see now the evils that worshiping a god of money can have. This is mostly associated with Wall Street because of New Yorks longstanding connection to both greed and the growing wealth of industries.

   We as a nation are at a crossroads in this country, our economy can no long function as it has served us in the past. Without proper reform, our debts will continue to pile up until the even the hope of paying them off will seem like a distant dream and the people will continue to rant and protest in the streets as fat cat corperations will continue to suck any remaining capital out of our pockets. The time to act and change is now; a future of social anarchy does not have to become the outcome of this financial crisis, but if we continue listening to these false prophets of Wall Street then our faith is sealed and damnation will awaits us all.

  
  

New Yorker Work, Reader Inference

   It's no surprise that New Yorkers see themselves as above the cut compared to everyone else. We see our city as one of the (if not the) best city not only in the United States, but globally based on our rich history, cultural superiority, and continuing strives in technology and economics. Yes, we can be seen as rather crude and sarcastic when it comes down to it, but by simply looking at our literature can clearly see a connection between the our past and present way of thinking.

   By simply looking at the title cover, we can view a seemingly classical painting of a pair of dress shoes sitting side by side next to a rather symbolical looking wall paper. In actuality this is not a painting in the traditional sense as it was created in a studio using paints and canvas, but it was created using the new "Brushes" App for the Ipad by renouned painter David Hockney. This point of new technology replacing the old ways of thinking is even more apparent in Hockney's advertisement for the new "The New Yorker" App where his more traditional painting is transfered from the old style of canvas and wet paint to the modern version of electronics and pixels.

   But it is not in just the arts and technology we express our supposide "superiority" among the other areas of the world. This magizine is filled with articles on editorial reviews of novels, poetry, and movies; all of them written from the perspective of the cultural elite of the Big Apple pouring over preformances and documents like an eldery wizard examining some lost texts of old.

New Yorker Work, Compare and Cite

   For my New Yorker Cover Art, I was selected to do David Hockney's IPad art creation called "Shoes." Looking at "Shoes" for the first time threw me into utter confusion; I expected the see a cover of a grand skyscraper, political symbol, or even a snapshot of Central Park! Not the simplistic painting of a pair of shoes lying before me on my desk, but after researching Hockney's other works I began to see a method to his style.
   After doing further research into Hockney's backround, I discovered that he had become a major advocate for drawing old classic paintings using new modern tecniques. More specifically, Hockney's most well know modern works have been created with his IPad app "Brushes" and he has been in contract with Apple to promote his art using their system. "Shoes" was painted on his IPad, but so were other striking successes including "Landscapes" and "Still Life Flowers" both shown on the left hand colum. In my mind, these classic painting being created using such sophisticated technology is like a wake up call to the rest of the art community.

   Classic painting is often times seen like a tradition set in stone. For example, for hundreds of years the stereotypical painter slaving over a canvas for sometimes weeks at a time to capture an image was for the most part true. This classical view of painting would be challenged by the prototype of today's modern artist; a group of "renegades" who first took shape in the 60s and 70s, and began a style of expression painting without much of a subject took hold. To the tradionalists at the time this was seen almost as a taboo, but this new style slowly grew in popularity and now no one in the art community would question this form of artisitic expression. Hockney and others like him, who are now also trying a new system for expression, are now also coming under the same scrutiny as thosebefore them. Using technology to create works of art that would otherwise be trapped within the mind of the creator; I see no wrong in this, but traditionalists may see it as another heresy growing with the times.

   Perhaps instead of looking at these new interpretations not like a step toward some emcompassing darkness without the guidance of the ways of old we should look at it like the next step in artistic evolution. Would cavemen have seen the transition from painting on cave walls to painting on paper canvas in the same way? Our world is rapidly becoming more based around the technological aspect of society; from our economy to our military even to our personal lifestyle, should our art be put on the same playing field and not confined to just past interpretations? Perhaps what Hockney is trying to explain in "Shoes" is that it's not just about a pair of shoes next to a wall, but that it's a metaphor for keeping the ways of old right next to the new and see where they can take us when we use both of them together.