Bickeboeller’s AP English Lang/Comp

One painting is by John Singer Sargeant and is called The Black Brook.  The other is a children’s portrait and it by Julie Gearan.  These two paintings have similar subjects, young girls, but they however have a very different feel and connotation to the painting.  These different connotations originate from the artists themselves and the environment that both artists were in at the time.
John Singer Sargent was born in on January 12, 1856 in Florence, Italy to an American family.  Sargent studied all around Europe and finally settled in Paris to study under Carolus-Duran.  He was very talented at painting portraits and landscapes in oil paints and watercolors.
Eventually, Sargent became very popular in Paris and many of his paintings were exhibited in the Salon.  After the painting Madam X created a scandal in Paris, Sargent was forced to move to London in order to escape the criticism in Paris.
Sargent never married or had any children so he was very close the one of his nieces named Rose Marie who had become a widow in 1914 when her husband died in WWI.  Rose Marie was Sargent’s favorite model, and painted her often.  In 1908 the painting The Brook, Rose Marie is the girl who is portrayed.  Many years after the painting was finished, Rose Marie was killed by a German bomb while attending a Good Friday service in church.
Because of the tragedy that arose from the life of his neice Rose Marie, the painting reflects these feelings. When first looking at the painting, one can see that it is a painting of a warm sunny day in the countryside, it is aesthetically pleasing, and one’s eye is drawn to the young girl sitting by the brook.  When the painting is examined more closely one can see that there is a shadow on this sunny day, and this shadow is cast on the girls upper body.  The girl’s legs and hand are in the light, and her dress is painted in light hues, similar to the rest of the painting that is in the light.  The girl’s upper body is painted in cool tones, and then everything else in the painting that is in shadow is in black or browns.  The contrasting colors on the girl give the painting a deeper meaning.  It says while everything seems to be bright and nice, there is a darkness that the girl is feeling.  Also, the girl’s line of vision is somewhat towards the brook.  She looks at the water wistful expression as if she is pining for someone.  The darkness of the brook along with the shadow on the girl gives the observer an idea that she really is pining. These two contrasting colors and values along with the detail of the girl shows that the emphasis is on her in the painting, and what she is feeling.  Because the girl is light and the brook is dark, the observer can make the conclusion that what the girl is thinking of is dark. Because of this, the imagery that this painting gives off is that the girl is feeling sadness.
Julie Gearan  is an artist of our time.  She lived in Chicago, but when she wanted a better and happier childhood for her children she moved to a more inviting place the raise them.  Here she paints her children and various portraits along with murals.  Painting wall murals is her main job, but currently she is trying to get her portfolio of portraits together.
As a mother of several children Julie Gearan wanted to paint portraits of her happy children.  In this painting of the young girl she seems to have an opposite effect that John Singer Sergeant’s painting of his niece had.  The painting shows lighter hues on the girl and darker ones on the background which makes the viewers eyes travel directly to the girl and stay focused on the girl.  Also the girl is exactly in the middle of the painting which further suggested that she is what is meant to be seen and looked at first.   The girls reflection is rosy and she is dressed in a white shift.  This white shift shows that she still has to innocence of childhood.  The look on her face is tranquil but it can be seen that she is happy and refined.  This is the exact opposite of Rose Marie in the Black Brook.  This child is happy and Rose Marie was rightly mourning.
Both these painting are of young women, but how the artist uses different color tones shows the readers a different connotation.  The shadow in the child’s portrait enhances the happiness seen in the child, whereas the shadow dashed across Rose Marie shows the sorrow.  Both these paintings are of portraits but the artist style from the artists allows the viewers to see the meaning.

The Black Brook

Children’s Portrait

i did it but it won’t load soooo yeah.  its on my computer and you kind of saw it so mmhm

After eating a banana, Fleur set the it down.  She was sitting in her language arts class and she decided she was done.  Done with being a senior.  Done with being at this god-forsaken school, and most importantly done with sitting in  a class getting pointless homework that she knew she would not do anyway.  She sighed and glanced up at the teacher who’s scruffy looking blond hair and shaggy bear bear always seemed to have something stuck in it.  At the beginning of the year, Fleur would have said something to him, but she figured meh he doesn’t seem to mind why should i?

There were 8 weeks of school left and Fleur with her shimmery flowing blond hair decided that she just wanted to be a wizard again.  She had spent her last year of school pretending to be a muggle, and now it seemed like such a stupid idea.  Except for the fact that she couldnt really go back since she was in hidding from Lord Voldemort.  When the bell rang to release them from class, Fleur ran out of the rooms and into the woods nearby.  There she cast a spell and felt satisfied for the day.  When suddenly out of no where DEATHEATERS!!

Along with the being a slacker second semester seinor she had to fight oh deathereaters.  Fluer goaned and lifted her shimmery looks in her hair and pulled, hard.  “Ah well this is the life of an in hiding wizard pretending to be a second semester muggle at a school that was ridiculous.”  They lifting her wand she screamed “Avada Kedavra”

Forman used photographs to make the greatest impact on the people.  He showed the rasicsm existed and through his photographs he made changes.  The photographs were distrubing, it showed a teenage boy using the American flag as a weapon against the black lawyer.  Racism is not okay on any level, whether it be against blacks, whites, middle eastern, or even asian.  It was good that Obama spoke out against racism but i do not think that he should have been in this piece which was so clearly against racism.  Obama seems to support racism with the fact that he has been attending  he church for 20 years where the pastor is so blatently racist against white.  I do not know if Obama is racist and hopefully he isnt, but being at the church makes it seems like he supports it.

In the essay about the two family portraits, the Peales and the Bellellis, Canady analyze the different family dynamics that the painters, well paint. Canaday points out that the first painter, Peale, paints his family in the same light, in the same lines which gives all members of the family the same limelight. If there was any disagreements in the family, Peale does not show it. Canaday points out that since all members of the family are equal and connected, they are all happy. The nurse too, who is not in contact with the family, is still happy and she takes pride in being with the family. It is a delightful painting, or so Canaday says because it does not clump the family together which would give it a bust look, but instead seperates them to give the viewers eyes peace.

Canaday points out that Degas is much different. Instead of concealing family dynamics, he exploits them. He shows the tensions between man, wife and the children. Canaday does this by positioning the family members in different ways. The mother and elder daughter are alike and well connected having a good connection with each other. The younger daughter wants to have a good relationship with her father, but since he is seperated and unattainable, Degas shows that mother and daughters are closer through contact. I agree with Canaday on this, but i don’t know if Peale’s family really wasn’t that happy.

The picture i chose was of a wood printed carving done by a German. The picture was of two angels carrying a head of Jesus. This is was the carving looked like at first glanced but on further reconsideration one can see that it is not Jesus’ head but a cloth with the outline of his face on it. Further more when we look at the history we see that the face is said to be to face of the artist who made it. The artist seems to now aspire to be Jesus. the angels hold it aloft looking at it and one looking away they dont know what to do with the piece of clothe with Jesus on it.

The fog of war was surprisingly an interesting movie.  It talked about Robert MacNamera and how he became of secretary of defense and how his brilliant career ended.  He was a very brilliant man and the film seemed to try to evict sympathy.  The film showed close ups of Robert talking and then showed pictures of him and the president or just pictures of things that he was talking about.  Overall the rhetorical strategies used in this film seemed to have a good outcome for MacNamera.  At the end of the film he seemed satisfied with what he had done, for he had tried to prevent nuclear way with cuba and the Soviet Union.

Shelly says “Poets are the unacknowledged legislators of the world.” This means that he thinks that since everyone thrives on poetry, and the poets don’t really know what they are talking about themselves, that they rule the world. He says “They measure the circumference and sound the depths of human nature with a comprehensive and all penetrating spirit, and they are themselves perhaps the most sincerely astonished at its manifestations; for it is less their spirit than the spirit of the age. Poets are the hierophants of an unapprehended inspiration; the mirrors of the gigantic shadows which futurity casts upon the present; the words which express what they understand not; the trumpets which sing to battle, and feel not what they inspire; the influence which is moved not, but moves.

Freedom. This is what our founding fathers fought for. Ruled by a government across the sea to founding fathers knew that injustice was being done to them, and knew that freedom was the answer to their problems. The people of America needed that freedom to live. They wanted freedom to have our own government, freedom to vote, freedom to live. The founding fathers said freedom was liberty.

Today, freedom is the basis of our country. The Founding Fathers lay the grounds for everything that we stand for in today’s society, and all this is based around freedom. American is the symbol of freedom. This first Amendment states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Everyday in our society people use this first Amendment. Some people think that this right is being taken away but it hasn’t been, our freedom is still the same today as it was the day the founding fathers made the declaration of Constitution. Our country has freedom within reason, which in today’s society means that there is not complete freedom. And this freedom, however to an extent allows and promotes happiness and the well-being of its people.

Complete and utter freedom would be the right to do anything that one desires. Although in the United States we have freedom on many things like; speech, job opportunities, and sexual orientation, there still are limits that are put about by the founding fathers that in today’s society we have not gotten completely over.

The reason we do not have complete freedom in today’s is because of human nature. Human nature is corrupt. It is the reason that gay marriage isn’t legalized, that people, lie, cheat, steal, and kill. The government in the United States is withholding some freedom because it cannot morally allow it for all things At school teachers exercise their use of freedom by saying what ever they want. Recently a teacher in Houston was verbally abusing kids. This is an example of someone using there rights of freedom an extent that the government of the United States of American will not allow. This teacher was in trouble because she was only trying to use you freedom of speech. When using freedom to the extent of hurting others, is something that America and its views on freedom. This is how freedom to an extent is used.

Murders also use freedom to an extreme extent, because they well kill and destroy the lives of others just because they want to. The government condemns this people, which is morally right. The total extent of freedom should never be used. It should never be used because then people would be free to do what ever they like, even if it physically or mentally harms others. This is the reason that we have laws and Amendments. The government tries to follow the founding fathers and give the people the most freedom that they should be allowed. True it may restrict some right, like gay marriage, but they are becoming more willing to change law and make more things legal. Here in America we have as much freedom as human nature will allow us.

Freedom in today’s society is the freedom that the government deems necessary for their people to have. This may however seem lightly restrictive and anger many people, but in fact freedom to that total extent is not necessary for the well being of the people. In fact to have restricted freedom so that murder in against the law give the United States citizens more freedom than otherwise. They have the freedom to let their children run around in the yard without feel of them being kidnapped. Or that in a workplace or school peers and co-workers won’t be verbally abused. This freedom that which what we need , this freedom allows happiness. Our country is a free one.

Our founding fathers have set the way for us today. As far as countries go I am happy to like in a Country based on freedom.

The book review i read was about Flann O’Brien by Flann O’Brien.  In this beginning of the book review her just wrote about things like what the book talked about.  Flann O’Brien “is the shadowy and indeed overshadowed hero of modern Irish fiction, the bronze medalist on a podium otherwise occupied by Joyce (gold) and Beckett (silver). Flann O’Brien’s relative inferiority is as much a matter of style as of substance. The top two were glamorously exilic, highly photogenic, eminently stern of artistic purpose.”  It is an okay review but i would like to  hear more about what was good or bad about the book.