FINAL PAPER #2 - Kim, Maureen (Yoo) English 3 & Section #19...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Kim, Maureen (Yoo) English 3 & Section #19 Lauri Mattenson Essay #3 Sept 3, 2010 I-It or I-You of the “Bosses of the Senate” Two years ago, I remember taking the AP United States History class and stumbling upon a satirical cartoon in one of my teacher’s lectures. Out of all the pictures he presented to us, the “Bosses of the Senate” by Joseph Keppler really caught my attention during a lecture about the Gilded Age. This political cartoon may hold a message to the people exaggerating the power of the monopolists. The content of the cartoon consists of the distinguished class between the “greedy and cynical” monopolists and the “greedy and gullible” legislatures (Bartels 24). Ac- cording to Martin Buber, Susan Sontag, and Howard Gardner, there are several ways to interpret art such as creating the “I-it” and “I-you” relationship, using mathematical-logical intelligence, spatial intelligence, intrapersonal intelligence, and realizing how art can provoke nervousness. By using these different ways to interpret art, I will attempt to examine “Bosses of the Senate.” In taking the first step to interpret this art, I held an “I-it” relationship. However as time elapsed, there was a shift in my relationship with the art from an “I-it” to an “I-you.” “I-it” is the partial, fragmented relationship that relies on the individual’s ego and their experience with- drawn from the art. My interpretation of the cartoon was fragmented because I was not able to take the time to further examine the cartoon. I was only able to see the basics--the monopolists shaped like moneybags, the apprehensive senators, the words describing the situation--and de- rived my interpretation of the cartoon which was similar to the one I learned in history class. I felt like I could not relate to the cartoon because as Jessie mentioned, “from taking the U.S. his- tory class, there was already an interpretation given to us and if we tried to deviate from that, our grade suffered so we never had that chance to connect with this cartoon.” Due to the lack of 1
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
chance to interpret this piece, I held a personal bias in my interpretation because of the way we were taught initially. As a result, I “assign[ed] it to a species and observe[d] it as an instance” be- cause the message was already given and from there I had to take it through the process of ego, the process that depended on me (Buber 55). In addition, my ego led me to take the thought pro- cess of what Buber mentioned: “I perceive something. I feel something. I imagine something. I want something. I sense something. I think something” (53). This process helped in the forma-
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 02/25/2012 for the course ENGLISH CO 3 taught by Professor Staff during the Summer '11 term at UCLA.

Page1 / 5

FINAL PAPER #2 - Kim, Maureen (Yoo) English 3 & Section #19...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online