325:questions:week_4_questions_comments-325_19
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision | |||
| 325:questions:week_4_questions_comments-325_19 [2019/09/19 12:52] – [Document: Edison Bowers, "Is It Safe to Work?"] 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 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" | ||
| -- Erin Madden | -- 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 | 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 | ||
325/questions/week_4_questions_comments-325_19.1568897544.txt.gz · Last modified: 2019/09/19 12:52 by jmcclurken