Wiki for Dr. McClurkens Courses

You've loaded an old revision of the document! If you save it, you will create a new version with this data.

**Only one post needed this week.--JM**

==== Geoffrey Bennett, “Colour Comes to All,” The Story of Popular Photography ====

"Colour Comes to All," was a very interesting read. When Bennett was explaining the origins of color photography, his remarks really stood out to me. **Bennett writes, “Almost as soon as there was a way to make permanent camera images, people wanted to add the dimension of colour to the straightforward shades of black and white,” (128).** This reminded me of the comment that Dr. McClurken made about the telegraph in class on Tuesday, about how shortly after the telegraph was introduced, people wanted to be able to do more with it. It also **reminds me of the idea of the fascination of novelty (one of the cultural values that promotes innovation) and the notion that things can always be better.** The moment people saw they could capture images in black and white, they wanted to find a way to create images with color. - Shannon Keene

“The big screen filled with a motion picture in color—color so clear, unburied, so utterly natural that my first impression was not of seeing a movie at all. It was more like looking out of a window at reality.” **This quote made it so clear how mesmerizing and shocking color movies really were**. This one quote makes it possible to look into the mind of a person who is so desensitized to TV and Movies, that it seemed more likely to be real life rather than a movie. Memories were able to be captured and played back. People, events, and memories were being etched into time, providing a perfect display of what life and people were like.  --- //[[abrooks6@umw.edu|Brooks Anna R.]] 2017/03/22 20:45//

Reading through this article, I was surprised that photography took a top-down pathway to the widely popular pastime it has become. **Imagining photography existing solely within a life of photography clubs for elites and enthusiasts of photography seems a bit far fetched at first, but then realizing that we do still see a form of this currently, as we typically see art galleries pricing their art and photographs in the high thousands and beyond during auctions. As widely popular as photography has become, there is still an elite appeal about it that has remained.**  --- //[[kmcgowan@umw.edu|McGowan Khayla J.]] 2017/03/22 21:25//

This article was very interesting because I did not realize that color photography date back as far as the 1840s. In the earlier stages of color photography it was very time consuming work, in addition to being expensive. This allowed color photography to be reserved for the elite who had the means to use and manipulate it to make it better. Bennett explains how this changed when George Eastman introduced flexible film in the 1880s. The social dynamic changed, "thereby bringing photography within reach of the general public, and changing it from an elitist pastime for the rich to a popular hobby.” (pg 132). The use of simpler cameras allowed for color photography to reach a broader audience. -Nicole Spreeman

“Kodachrome film was in short supply for many years, and was eagerly sought by amateur British Enthusiasts.” This article brings forth the idea that the early on dominance battle between England and America came from not only agriculture, weapons, and other necessary pieces of technology, but the entertainment segment as well. In America, Kodak made quicker advancements than England did in this field of colored pictures. I find it interesting to see that even as late as 1942, they were still trying to catch up to each other in the technology realm.--Kelsey Dean

Like many things, the new implementation of color photograph was mainly reserved for the rich in its early stages. Originally beginning in special clubs and then the invention of the amateur camera. Despite the fact that color photography began in the 1840s, it did not reach the common household till long after that. **I have seen evidence of that in family photographs. I can look at my grandparents photos and see the switch from black and white to color, allowing me to see when color photography reached them.** --Kasey Mayer

I found this article to be really interesting. One reason I found this interesting was because for most of his life, he was a photographer and even had his own darkroom in his house. I had never really thought about how the change from black and white film to color would have affected him - either in the amount of work he had to do to produce the film, or in general what it meant to have a picture and have it show exactly what it's capturing, including the color. - Helen Salita

Reading this article makes me realize that I take the ability to capture high-quality photographs whenever I want for granted. At the beginning of the semester, **we discussed how technology is a product of human want and desire. Few inventions embody that more than color photography. I am struck by the extent to which society was captivated by color photography: “The film was welcomed with euphoria by the photographic public” (**134). According to the text, “In the space of a few years the serious amateur could become a good and admired photographer without possessing a dark room or any of its related skills” (139). This is reflective of what we see today with smartphones and online platforms like YouTube and social media: anybody can be a photographer or a news breaker. Photographic technology evolved from being a product exclusively for the elites, to being a product whose demand greatly exceeded its supply, to companies bringing smaller-sized products to market, and to having the prices drop significantly by the seventies and eighties. This timeline is eerily familiar to how modern technology like smartphones, laptops, and gaming consoles, evolves today.- Yousef Nasser

==== Christine Kleinegger – “Out of the Barns and into the Kitchens: Transformations in Farm Women’s Work in the First Half of the Twentieth Century.” ====

**“If not for your wife, then for your daughter” (Pursell 181).** This quote interested me because at this time (1917) it showed how the father was more concerned about buying labor saving devices to keep their daughter(s) happy instead of making their wife happy. The farmers doing this for their daughter kept them on the farm to help with daily chores while the wife was already constricted to staying because of their marriage. – Jessie Cavolt

I found this article to be very interesting as to how it described income distribution on a farm in the early 1900s. While most women would do household tasks, lug water back and forth, and raise poultry, men would be out in the fields with new types of technology and machines. Clearly the women were not having it based on the fact that women in Nebraska created a 'technological agenda' in 1923 with six items that they should get to improve the home for every item her husband received to improve the farm (Pursell 181). 
**Running water is definitely something that we all currently take for granted however, these women were having to lug up to 175 gallons of water daily in order to sustain their household (Pursell 180).** For so long, men would not agree to have running water in the house, but with the attention gained from the technological agenda and some wives forcing their husbands to carry the water the men finally realized how difficult of a task this was. I think this article does a great job of showing what the gendered tasks were like and how far technology and household roles have come since this time. -Emma Baumgardner

When I read this article by Christine Kleinegger, I liked how **she really shed light on how there was clear gender transition within the household when the production of food changed from in the farms to in the factories.** Women were no longer responsible for making the cheese and gathering the milk for her household. Instead she was responsible for going to the stores and buying different types of sold foods that came from the factories. While the men transitioned to working in the factories to financially support their family. Kleinegger even states in the article that . . . “Because of factory competition, many farm women no longer trained their daughters in the tasks of butter making” (173.) In addition, there were  a surplus of machinery used on household farms. However, Kleinegger points out in  a survey that was performed by the USDA that “42% of the farms surveyed had power-driven farm machinery, while only 15% of the homes had power-driven appliances for household use” (181). My interpretation from these findings was that there was clear gender divide when it came to chores within a household. **Men were viewed to be more masculine so they could “handle” complicated machinery, while women were viewed to be precise and too fragile to work machinery in a home.** I think this is one of reasons why women were resorted back to working in the home and men were sent to work outside the home. - Rachel Kosmacki

As the homemade making of goods such as butter and eggs began to became less common and economical and became mass produced, farm women were left in a contradicting position. Kleinegger defines this position as, “the farm women’s new role as a consumer and her old role as the wife of a producer” (177). **The barn and the farming, which was formerly a shared space and group effort between man and woman, become more solidly divided into gendered places of outside vs. inside, man vs. female. While their husbands began to invest in modern farm equipment, farm women were forced to deal with antiquated household items that made their work even more difficult.** The struggle and persuasion involved in getting their husbands to install running water hammers in gender roles in which women is a domestic household servant whose job is to know how to buy smartly to get her work done best.   –Anna Collins

**"Labor-saving devices failed to liberate women from housework; on the contrary, women spent at least as much time as before meeting higher standard,"(186).** I think this quote sums up what this section of the reading is about. As more technology was introduced into the home, women were expected to do more in the household. The higher standards became the norm for women, and if they didn't have access to the technology, then they couldn't meet those standards, and thus were looked down on by other women. - Heidi Schmidt
==== Venus Green, African American Women in the Bell System, 1945-1980  (1995) ====

In Greene’s piece she argues that African American women are crucial to the overall history of all workers (270). In Graham’s telephone system, black women began to replace white women as operators. This change was facilitated as telephone operators became more obsolete. (271) The Bell system encouraged mostly white women instead of women of color to advance to higher positions. (268) Even unions discriminated against black women. For instance, TTU claimed “reverse racism” because black women were hired for lower level jobs. **Therefore, Green argues that racism crossed gender lines. As the Bell system evolved, the company placed women of color into clerical positions which were a great distance from their homes (275). Ultimately Greene argues that the Bell system “limited the employment of African American women…Telephone companies offered black women employment only as operators or low level clerks at the very time that white women’s opportunities expanded.”** (281) Therefore, black women were displaced when newer technology replaced them. (281) 
 --- //[[ejames@umw.edu|James, Emily B.]] 2017/03/22 14:47//
==== Other readings ====

"Some Notes on Vocational Guidance"-Waddel

The values of American society in the early 20th century are made clear by Waddel’s statement that “Engineering, and after it surgery and medicine, may well be considered the most vital and critical of professions” (155). As we can see, mechanical knowledge and ability is ranked higher than saving lives in terms of importance to society. Also, this society is one driven by the traditionally male disciplines that called for only the most psychologically qualified and intellectually robust “young men” (156).  For the first time, we see a shift from the value of people to a value of things, such as structures and possessions. This change in mentality will come to define American culture in the 21st century and has led to the obsession with “the race to the top” concept of materialism. --- //[[htaylor2@umw.edu|Taylor Heather L.]] 2017/03/22 19:27//

Waddell talks about the value of engineering as a field and "disciples themselves should be well assured of their qualifications" (155). There is suddenly a value put on those who have had extensive schooling or training as engineers. Waddell also discuses the idea of educating the public on the field by "write-ups from time to time in the newspapers...telling about the engineering profession in general, and incidentally referring to the suggested book, would be exceedingly helpful" (157). As a result the society grew to have a admiration and reverence for engineers, "If the youth of the country were thoroughly posted about the profession of engineering, its scope, its difficulties and its rewards, there would be fewer applicants for admission to its ranks," (157). This idea of the difficulty that daunts many who consider an engineering career or degree began in the 20th century and carried on into modern day society views on Engineering. - Laura b. Downs

Edit summary

Note: By editing this page you agree to license your content under the following license: CC Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International