Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- 325:questions:week_4_questions_comments-325_19 [2019/09/19 12:51] – jmcclurken
+++ 325:questions:week_4_questions_comments-325_19 [2019/11/14 02:33] (current) – 108.45.143.34
@@ Line 29: / Line 29: @@
 In art, Railroads are a way to integrate man and machinery in with nature. They are a sign of advancements in technology and transportation in a time where there were not as many ways to transport things fast. I think Cam said it perfectly, "The railroads always seem to merge with the landscape rather than disrupt them allowing the natural beauty to remain the central feature of the works while the railroads and locomotives play a supporting role in the overall scene". In the art, railroads are more connected to the land with emphasis in cohabitation.
 -- Erin Madden
+Railroads were glorified in American art. They ranged from a seemingly almost religious glow about them, to a variant of dirty and dark imagery. I supposed the content of the art depended heavily on which side of the political spectrum the artist subscribed to regarding railroads. - Elizabeth Davis
 The main argument from Danly that I got from reading this was basically the answer to the second question as well. The way that railroads and trains were portrayed in America is that it is a piece of technology that practically can be  put anywhere and not disrupt nature. Artists and photographers constantly made the railroads look as if they just fell into the landscape. **Its really cool to read about this because I never really have thought how photography could have persuaded the public at this time. If the trains in pictures seem to be doing no harm it could make sense to someone that they aren’t.** On page 12, the picture of the train going through the mountains adds to this idea and Danly even argued that “suggesting the easy assimilation of new technological forms into the aesthetic mode of the picturesque.” (page 13) meaning that putting technology into pictures of things the public was familiar with would overall bring normality to it. -Tory Martin
@@ Line 55: / Line 57: @@
 When reading this article, I was very interested to see how many fatalities there are in industrial accidents. I never knew  how dangerous and how negligent the work environment is and how many are due to human mistakes. This is similar to McEvoy's article as the companies focus more on the cost than the accident itself. McEvoy says " That we call workplace injuries "accidents" rather, than, say "production costs". (p.89) Which then leads to saying "labor is more than just an economic activity controlled by impersonal market forces: it is the manifestation of the worker's life force." Which means it is not just about the money and the costs due to an accident, but should be more on the what causes these accidents and the lack of protection. It is a human life, yes we must adapt, but safety precautions should be in place with sufficient state inspections. --- Erika M.
-In this reading McEvoy discusses the relationship between technology and increased industrialization and the environment as well as living conditions of those around industries and technology. First McEvoy talks about the changes in living conditions that come along with technological development, “it has roots in and impacts on its environment”; the most obvious example of this is the decrease of air quality due to pollution. McEvoy continues on to discuss the physical dangers of the workplace, and introduces the perspective of occupational hazards. As technology has developed, you can see the number of injuries or problems rooted in the workplace increase which has caused a perceived relationship between the two. -Emma Monaghan
+In this reading McEvoy discusses the relationship between technology and increased industrialization and the environment as well as living conditions of those around industries and technology. **First McEvoy talks about the changes in living conditions that come along with technological development, “it has roots in and impacts on its environment”; the most obvious example of this is the decrease of air quality due to pollution. McEvoy continues on to discuss the physical dangers of the workplace, and introduces the perspective of occupational hazards.** As technology has developed, you can see the number of injuries or problems rooted in the workplace increase which has caused a perceived relationship between the two. -Emma Monaghan