Art as a Culture

FUNCTIONS OF EARLY ART:

There are numerous interpretations to the cave paintings. I believe that the paintings were a form of ritual for the animals and the hunting seasons. One reason I believe this hypothesis is because the animals are all painted in groups, probably painted before each season. 

I believe that there were more animals than people in the paintings because the paintings were done as a form of ritual for the animals and hunting season. There was no need to add lots of people to the paintings. 

If my interpretation of the paintings is correct, the paintings tell us that the cave dwellers were spiritual. They didn't purposely create art like modern artists do. Also, they painted in a cave, not somewhere easily visible which indicates that their purpose wasn't to create art for everyone to see. Rather it was a way for them to ritualize the animals in hopes of a good hunting season. They were very artistic but I don't think creating art was their intentions. 

They went through lots of difficulties painting in these caves. They were always in danger while in the caves. As the interactive video shows, there are some parts in the cave that get really narrow. Also, it must have been really dark in there. They were painting on rock which cannot be easy. They used several methods of painting, depending on the rock surface and color that they wanted. 

One function of this art could be the one I already mentioned. That is, a form of ritual for the animals and hunting seasons. A second function could be a way they document past hunting successes. A third function could be them merely painting the animals they see around them. 

COMMONALITIES IN FUNCTION:

Once again, if my interpretation is correct, common forms of modern art could be religious paintings. One image I used to see in my old neighborhood was a painting of the Virgin Mary. It was often painted on the business buildings. I am almost sure that the owners painted it so the wall wouldn't get tagged on. It definitely worked, you might see graffiti on the wall right next to the painting but never on the painting of the Virgin Mary. In both cases, the people created art. But they did so with other intentions in mind. The early humans did it to have a successful hunting season. The modern humans did it so they wouldn't have to continuously paint over the graffiti on their walls. 

INTRODUCE US TO YOUR FAVORITE ART: 

David, Oath of the Horatii, 1784  

Paintings can serve an endless amount of functions. Depending on the time in which it is painted and on the painter and the message he is trying to convey. They can communicate anything they want. Also, paintings don't always present a message that the painter wants to make. Artists are often commissioned and paint whatever they are told to paint. The painting above is a history painting used to promote patriotism and sacrifice. 

There is definitely a complete culture for what is known as "classical art". Though I do not think there is a complete culture in painting as a whole. There is such a variety in paintings that there are a lot of cultures within it. For the culture of classical art, most people probably attended college where they learned certain language to describe the paintings. They often travel to museums and art galleries where they learn more.

This art form benefits society because it provides us with history. It gives us an insight on how people felt during the time the painting was made. For example, the famous painting Scream by Edvard Munch gives us an insight on how people felt during imperialism and the age of anxiety. It can definitely have negative affects because it is a form of art that can be used to brain wash people. The art form by itself cannot be detrimental. 

Edvard Munch, Scream, 1893

Politics and Violence

1. Since the Yanomamo have no formal laws, the rules regarding killing and the consequences for it are not explicitly laid out as they are in Western cultures. Instead they have customs and general rules about proper behavior. Conflicts emerge when these customs are broken but unlike Western cultures, the Yanomamo people must take action on their own, without any governmental assistance. They, along with their close kin, must fight for themselves. 
2. Most fights amongst the Yanomamo begin over sexual issues. Once the fight begins the village splits into two new groups. Each group lead by two prestigious men of opposing sides. This occurs because the Yanomamo population seek revenge for previous killings. Thus, it is a continuing cycle of revenge killing amongst the Yanomamo population. 
3. By obtaining the status of unakais, men earn prestige and are not seen as easy targets for future raids. By earning that title, their close kin are also safer, namely his wife. Non-unokais would benefit by never killing someone who was once part of their kin. A man would choose to become an unokais so that he wouldn't be seen as weak. Also, the more aggressive you are, the less kin you will lose in the end. Since you will have reputation for fast retaliation which will scare off future attacks. 
4. A) Political Structure - For the Yanomamo, revenge killings are their form of political structure. Though they have no written laws for breaking their customs, all the Yanomamo population knows that once they break the customs they are in danger of encountering revenge killings. B) Social Status/Social Organization - Groups within the Yanomamo culture that retaliate fast and effectively during revenge killings earn good reputations. Other groups within the culture will not attack them as easily, knowing that the group will retaliate with precision. Therefore, a group can earn high social statuses through effective revenge killings. C) Kinship - Because revenge killings continuously splits the village into separate groups, eventually the men begin fighting other men who were  once their kin. D) Marriage and Reproduction - Men with the title of unokais are likely to have more women and thus more children. Also, a man who has a good reputation will have less problems with other men trying to seduce or hurt his women. 
5. Although most people are against killing, they also agree that killing in certain circumstances is permissible. That is why it is important to have laws against killing. For example, in the Yanomamo culture revenge killings are permissible and they never end because there is no law putting an end to the killings. If there were laws and a justice system similar to ours, at least in theory, the killers would be sent to prison and end the continuous cycle of revenge killings. Without laws, people could find excuses to do something that most people should not want to do. 

Maria Araceli Lua

1. I interviewed my mother, Maria Araceli Lua (maiden name Maria Araceli Huerta). She was born in Guadalajara, Mexico on December 9, 1969. She grew up in a working class family migrated to the USA at age 3. Although she grew up in the United States she identifies herself as being Mexican with Mexican culture. 
2. I think that my thoughts during the interview would have been completely different had I not been interviewing my mother. I was definitely comfortable throughout the entire interview. I never experienced awkwardness. I actually laughed a few times because my mom had trouble remembering close relative's names. Had I not been interviewing my mom I would of never known that she forgot to mention a relative. I wouldn't have felt as comfortable as I did and I would of definitely been more nervous. 
3. When my interviewee was young, she migrated with her family to the United States. Her mother is the only person who didn't stay in Mexico (that is, all of her mother's siblings still live in Mexico). Her father is an only child. Therefore Maria would only see her extended family when she went to Mexico for vacation. She was very close to her parents and siblings. Thus I wouldn't say there is an emphasis on either maternal or paternal lines. The biggest age difference between her siblings is about 7 years so they don't really have different attitudes towards each other. Maria talks to her parents, grandparents, aunts, and uncles, which are all older, with more respect than she would with younger family members. The older generations tend to be larger but the newer generations tend to be smaller. Her father is an only child but that is because his parents were never in a relationship, they just had a child together. Had they been together, they would of probably had a large family since that was common back then. There are no ethnic differences, as of now everyone in the family is Mexican. 
4. I do know my relatives from both my mom and dad's side of the family well. I do socialize equally with them, besides the two aunts on my dad's side that live in Mexico. In my family my mom has the most influence in decisions made. Mainly because my dad is more passive and since  they are the parents she ends up making the decisions. Family members that have been part of the family through marriage for a long time don't get treated differently. Although, the newly added members of the family do get treated differently. Yes there are different attitudes towards family members based upon gender. Women in the family are supposed to be good daughters, sisters, wives, and mothers. While the men are treated like macho men. Family members are content with the women in our family being receptionists or a job of that sort. While the men are expected to have job, mainly laborious, that make good money. I have learned that my family fits the stereotypical Mexican family. We are a big family in which most members still believe in gender norms. I realized that our family has been split apart in several different generations because of our locations. My grandmother left her family when she came to the United States. I also have two aunts on my fathers side that left the US to go back to Mexico. If we all lived closer together, my family would seem much larger. 

Subsistence and Economy

Part 1:

1. Benefits
• Hunting and gathering 
• Societies that rely on hunting and gathering are normally small, resulting in less struggle to find food to feed everyone
• They only hunt and gather food to feed themselves, they don't have to struggle trying to have a surplus of food
• They do not have to depend on any outside sources besides nature to find food  
• Agriculture 
• Allows for societies to grow bigger because a surplus of food can be available 
• They can settle in one place because they don't have to constantly move to follow hunting seasons 
• Trade is made more possible with agricultural societies
2. Disadvantages 
• Hunting and gathering
• Because hunter gatherers have to constantly move, it is impossible to settle in one place
• Since land is very important for them, oftentimes they must fight for it
• Since hunter gather populations are often small, it is more difficult for them to fight of larger populations when fighting for land. 
• Agriculture 
• Because they typically grow surplus amount of food, by the time they eat it is might not be fresh 
• Typically, agricultural populations are big so if a harvest goes bad a lot of people are affected by it. Consequently, it is harder to repair from a bad harvest. 
• In order to keep the harvest going smoothly, a lot of time and effort must be involved
3. Hunting and gathering provides a healthier diet because they typically eat fresh food soon after it is hunted. Also, the crops they gather don't have pesticides that crops would have in an agricultural harvest.
4. Early human populations probably transitioned to agriculture instead of hunting and gathering because it allows for the population to settle down in one place. In doing this, it takes away the hassle of moving from place to place. By staying in one place, they probably felt that their land was secure and it would be hard for other populations to fight for it. Once they settled down, it was possible for them to have more stuff because they didn't have to deal with traveling with it. Once they had a surplus of food or other things, they probably began trading with others. 

Part 2:

1. The statement points out that in order to trade, a surplus must be available. Without a surplus amount, nobody would really consider trading since the stuff they have is stuff they need. In order to begin thinking about trade, surplus must be at hand. 
2. One social benefit of trade is the possibility of sharing regional resources, such as wheat, that enhance a populations well being. Another social benefit is the communication (of different peoples) that arises through trade. 
3. A negative social result of trade would be greed. Another negative social result is that trade opens up the possibility for certain people to gain power. 
4. Agriculture facilitated the possibility of surplus amounts of food. With that surplus, people realized they didn't need it all and began trading it for other things they did not have.