I’ve emailed you both projects Professor. Thank you.

I plan to transcribe one mimesis to another. My very first blog is my interpretation of the song classical gas. I didn’t realize at the time, but I wrote a thousand words on it. I think it would be neat if I made the song in a short story or prose. Unfortunately, my time is up, since it’s already Tuesday night, but nonetheless, hopefully, Professor, I can sneak in my short prose by the end of this week, while you grade everyone else’s papers and blogs.

Mimetic exploration in works of art is valuable because it’s ethical, giving the audience a chance to reflect on actions that are good or evil. However, there are contents that are unique to each and every individual mimetic work of art that are beyond simply actions, and when the audience perceives that content, they understand more precisely what the author intends.

In Poetics, Aristotle explains that in Narrative, what the imitator is imitating is actions. A character in a novel, lyre and flute players, actors in aplays, poets, and even dancers, all are representing actions of excellent men or bad men. But Aristotle introduces his poetics by telling us that he proposes not only to speak of poetry, but of its species and repective capacities (2316).

In the movie Unbreakable, with actors Bruce willis and Samuel L. Jackson as Bruce and Elijah Price, Director m line shamalon gives the audience mimetic content that is so intertwined with the actions fo the characters, that the perceptions of that content both complicates, and yet affirms our ethical judgements fo the actions fo Elijah Price. The theme of the film is centered aroud comic book hears, and Elijah, a comic book gallery owner, is convinced that Burce willis is a real superhero who has super strength and cannot be physically harmed. Elijah thinks this precicesly because Bruce was the sole serviver of a 900 passanger train wreck, and he did not get a singe scratch from it. In elijah’s first attempt to persue Bruce, he leaves im a Purple note that unexpectedly directly sypathizezes with Brucescurrent disposition. Bruce meets with him waring his Green coat as usual, while Elijah wears a purple leather jacket, and there tells him who he thinks Bruce actually is. [As they become friends, Elijah tells bruce that he was born with a certain desease that cuases his bones to ract like glass if something hits them, easily shattering them, and this is whay why the kids used to tease him and call him “mr. Glass.”] As they become friends, Bruce invites Elijah to his wok as a Secruity grard for a stadium, where he also wears a Green jacket. By the end of the movie, Bruce Discovers, with the Help of Elijah, that he is a superhero with super strength and invisibility, and Elijah, knowing that Bruce also has the ability to see People’s crimes, tells him it’s time to shak hands. When he does, Samilon portrays there black and white scenes of catastrophies, including bruces wreck, whil Elija alsone is colored, wearing a purple suit in each scene, highliting his accossiation with those wrecks. Finally we discover that Mr. glass is the villain.

M light shamalon hints that Elijah is the villain by contrasting him to the hero,. While the main focus is on Bruce, the hero (Aristotle’s good man), throughout the entire film. The content he uses reference comic book themes, like thematic coloring, appropriate titles, and opposite biological integrity. If the viewer recognizes these contents that are closely related to comic book thems, he would perviece what Shmailon was actually conveying; not that Elijah is a good character, because his actions are good, but a bad one. However, the compications that arise when the audience judges Elijahs actions——Elijah seems to perform actions====Smalon leads the audience away from perceiving that Elijah is the villain by allowing themto judge Elijah for his actiosn, which essentially seem like thos a a good man, as he sypmpathizes with bruce and helps him discover his purpose in life. However, shmilon does incorporate thematic comic book content that hints perceiving Elijah actually as an evil character.

Mimetic exploration in works of art is valuable because it’s ethical, giving the audience a chance to reflect on actions that are good or evil. However, there are contents that are unique to each and every individual mimetic work of art that are beyond simply actions, and when the audience perceives that content, they understand more precisely what the author intends.

In Poetics, Aristotle explains that in Narrative, what the imitator is imitating is actions. A character in a novel, lyre and flute players, actors in aplays, poets, and even dancers, all are representing actions of excellent men or bad men. But Aristotle introduces his poetics by telling us that he proposes not only to speak of poetry, but of its species and repective capacities (2316).

In Jack London’s novel, The Sea Wolf, the narrator is the voice of one of the main characters, Van weiden, who introduces himself by reflecting on his lifestyle before he met captain Wolf Larson, as a rich and intellectual bachelor who’s hobbies include reading, writing, and contemplating. He tells us that one of the articles he’s just read written by Emily Heart, was so fascination, and her article was so intriguing, that he wrote a critique of it, though not to be sent to her, but still printed in other artlicles. At this point, one might reflect on how comorting this man’s lifestyle is, and that he’s already living life at it’s peak. I suggest that one might think this because obviously, the person is reading London’s book, meaning that he or she enjoys contemplating and learning (assuming the person freely chose to read and was not forced either by a person or situation), and since he has the leisure to read, then he must really be admiring Van weiden’s reflection of the past. But the reader reaches his peak of admerations when van weidens actions are contrasted to wolf larsons. The readr is introduced with him yelling and cursing his lungs out at his now dead sailr, then dumps him at sea with one line of ulogy that the end of a furnal, then turns around and punches a disobedient sailor so hard, that the young sailor is on the ground for some time; showing no remourse for the dead sailor or for the injured one. Clearly, the reader easily would recognizez van weiden as a good character, who’s actions are good and worthy of leaning form, whiel judging that the actions of caption Wolf Larson are bad beaseu he seems a bad character. However, the content that could me missed, but that essentially warns the reader not to judge the characters just yet is that van weiden is Reflecting back on his previous lifstye and wolf larsons,l and even explicitly tells the reader of his Preious view of of his own lifestyle and wolf larsons. Although his reclecing does nott switch the audiences view of Van weidens actions as bad and wolf larsons as good, as London inevitablt does, it does signal the reader suspend quick judgement. The reason is that London assumes the voice of Van Weiden as Narrator, and not his own.

Thus, the narrator argues to his readers not to judge too quickly because these past actions are how he Used to perceive his own life (Write about tone of voice) his won life and wolf Larsons, and that when his reflections come near present, Then the reader more assuredly perceives Wolf Larsen in the light Jack London intends [the past is not as bettered as the present]. Thus, a content the readers perceives in Jack London’s book is that the narrator is reflecting, and therefore describing how he previously vied his lifestyle and actions, which in turn implies that here is another way judging the situation and actions that the narrator intends him to see. –The title tells us the focus is on Wolf Larson.

In his Poetics, Aristotle talks about poetry, drama, flute-playing and lyre-playing as if they are the only kinds of arts that are mimetic. And even then, that part of the notion of these arts is ethical, since the object of the performer is to imitate the action of a good or bad person. I, however, argue that mimetic works of today’s day and age are well beyond poetry and a performer, and that the notions of mimesis within these arts are not themselves ethical, but nonetheless, 

Overall, I will discuss three kinds for mimetic explorations, which are (absolutely no reality, combination of reality and imitation, and in reality, imitating the imitations). All the examples I give in this blog I assume are artistic, but the key element of all these arts is imitation.

Aristotle essentially says that the mimetic exploration an audience engages in within an art is ethical, since the objects the imitator presents are good or bad actions of an agent. But does mimesis necessarily have to have an agent? And while Aristotle specifically talks about the mimesis of drama, poetry, flute-playing and lyre-playing, and epic narratives, in today’s day and age, there are all kinds of aesthetic notions that we might call “art,” ones that Aristotle may never have thought of, such as video games, Facebook, film, and advertisements. Still, there are other notions of mimesis that existed in Aristotle’s time that were not priority for his Poetics, but ones that we might still consider as as mimetic and artistic, and especially aesthetically pleasurable, likeincluding And other arts such as sculpture and pottery, and even humor, like joking. Even blogs are mimetic. All of these italicized aesthetic explorations have their own notions of mimesis that’s relevant to the art, specific notions that the the audience engage in when exploring these arts. But was Aristotle right to say that such mimetic notions are ethical, portraying either good actions or bad actions? Even in todays day and age, I argue that Aristotle did get it right, and in this blog I will attempt to explore each and every one of the notions of the italicized arts to discover a most definite end in ethics, either good or bad.

I am comparing two forms of argument: direct or explicit argument containing premises and a conclusion in statement form, such as basic syllogisms or complex essays, versus indirect or implicit argument, which also contain premises and conclusions, but in a form that does not transparently tell you what’s being argued, such as films, novels, poems, advertisements, body language, all of which use certain elements, a.k.a. props, to hint at what you are to figure out, and this is what I want to focus on in my final project. {TO BE CONTINUED}…4/27/2011

What Hitchcock says in this interview intrigues me the most, right at 2:24. But watch it from the beginning to better understand what Hitchcock is getting at. It ties in with Walton’s view of pseudo-fear, hence, pseudo-reality which we cannot “endure…”…TO BE CONTINUED [4-25-2011]

Here’s the solo guitar version.

Classical gas breaks down into five parts: intro, 1^st part, 2^nd part, 3^rd part, and conclusion. Intro and conclusion are slow pace, and the middle parts are separated by the climaxes (except for the 3^rd part, where it alludes to the climax, but doesn’t repeat it).

I imagine this entire song as a story being told by someone about his experience in a particular situation, where there is a dilemma or dilemmas, and solution(s). The slow pace of the introduction (1-19 sec), in contrast to the fast pace of most of the song, is the orator giving the audience a glimpse of the story he’s about to tell. Since the intro does not follow a strict rhythm, it’s as if the storyteller is pausing here and there, reflecting on this significant past event, and at the same time whetting our appetites and engaging us to hear further. Just before the end of the intro (12-15 sec), the quick and inclining series of notes hints at a good ending to this story. The ending of the intro, however, does not leave us with a sense of completion, but just the opposite, as it ends on an ambiguous note.

(20 sec) Then the story begins in full detail. In general, music is voice-like, and as I said, I imagine this song as a story, and more specifically, of an experience the speaker went through; thus, the focus now is on the person, which allows us to sympathize with his circumstances.

The segment of the first part before the climax repeats four times, and in it, there is a combination of low and high notes. The notes interact with each other, but the high notes lead the conversation while the low notes thoughtfully respond. I say thoughtfully because the low notes, having a deep sound, disposes me to a sense of meaning and importance, and hence, something internal and personal; what we truly value. Since the high notes lead, they’re actively asking the question(s), and the repetition is as if the person has something on his mind and it’s not a trivial thing, but some situation perhaps, where he’s thoughtfully involved, and he keeps reflecting on this same thing, asking, inquiring, and investigating this situation that’s fully occupying his mind (in my own version, instead of the segment repeating four time at the same volume, I increase the intensity, especially with the low notes, so that the volume fills up the space in the audience’s minds, affecting them to be solely concerned with the situation, and just as the speaker, the their own minds are fully occupied with the situation and thus, they more sincerely sympathize).

(43 sec) The repetition breaks, signifying a break in the person’s repetitive reflection of his dilemma.  Here, the low and high notes are not responding to each other, but instead, are following a linear sequence: low low high high x2, low high high x2. The orderliness reminds me of steps or procedures; instructions. Thus, the person is breaking from his day dreams and is now taking initiative to change what’s bothering him. Therefore, 43-49 sec. is the plan, and if so, then the proceeding is the execution. Following the well thought out instructions, he puts his plan into action. With each beat from 53-56 sec, the notes gradually become higher in pitch; first there are two backup notes for each high note, and then only one note. For instance, capital letters with represent the emphasized high notes: DA da da, DA da da x2, then DA da, DA da, DA climax. My point is the notes becoming higher in pitch, depicting progression, and hence, hope; and while in the former, two notes follow a high note four times, only one note follows in the latter, as if the person was following his instructions and found the it was working, and that there’s progress; so much so, the he begins to rely less on his instructions (hens, less notes following) and he’s now running with progress. Then, CLIMAX; success! Dilemma resolved!

2^nd part. In the instrumental version, the instruments continue without the guitar. This period of time where the guitar isn’t playing is sort of like the person reposing for some time without predicament. (1:32-1;43 sec) But soon, the guitar comes in again, and this sequence also sounds like there’s another situation that’s bothering him. There is only one low note repeating over and over, while the high notes on the guitar fret board go 3, 1, 0; 0…then reverse: 0, 1, 3; 5, 3, 1, 0. Notice how the notes decline, then incline, then decline again. He’s thought over this situation, forward and back, and the voice inside him isn’t giving him hope; that low note is not encouraging, and keeps repeating. Finally, he throws his hands up in the air in despair. But then at 1:44 sec, my favorite part, there is just something in those notes that reminds me of kindness, and so, the person is uplifted and encouraged. Then at 1:53 sec, only low notes, I take them seriously; that is, there is a serious tone that comes off, and it’s sort of like a maturing, moving on from this growing pain and deeply learning from this experience. Then, he’s ready to ‘attack’ again, and knows exactly what and where he’s going, and then gets there (climax).

3^rd part. The same sequence of the first part plays again, but only twice, not four times. Also, the rest of the sequence comes from the third part. Thus I think, now a little older and a little wiser, the person is in a situation that he’s previously faced, only this time, he does not allow it to occupy his mind for too long, but responds quickly and goes straight for the solution (climax). However, just as he’s about to reach that point, he does not proceed, although he easily could. This shows now his mastery of himself and the situation; the dilemma no longer plagues him because he does not allow it to.  Also, when he chooses not to proceed, it’s a sort of the storyteller winking at us, because he was leading up to the point of the climax, but comes down without hesitation, as if he was leading us on. Therefore the wink is sort of like the speaker telling his audience, “I’m not giving you the ending/epiphany that easily; your turn to reflect now.”

The ending is slow pace, and hence we come out of the story and back to the storyteller and his audience.  Again, the slowness reminds me of someone reflecting. Finally, the song ends with a very satiating A chord, and leaves us full and done with the song.