Christopher McCauley
The World Metro Map, by Mark Ovenden, which hangs in the Tate Modern Museum in London, is a very different piece of art. It is a “parody,” for lack of better words on the design of the map for the London Underground System. The “map,” is made up of a crude representation of the entire globe, and the stations represent different major cities all over the world. I think this piece of art suggests to lead the nation forward because it depicts how tied together we are with the entire globe. There is not one city that can not be reached by some means except for a few in the area represented by Africa; however this area is shown as “under construction,” which means that attempts are being made at linking this part of the globe as well. Ovenden shows our nation as a part of the whole (world, that is). I think if Plato were to look at this piece of art he would be slightly confused. I am sure he would not know what Vancouver or Jakarta is, and I do believe he would not enjoy the fact that Sparta is not shown on a representation of today’s world. Context aside however, Plato would argue that this piece of art is only the “essence,” of what today’s world is. We would like to believe that we are all connected on a lovely little subway map, but the truth is we are caught up in war, and violence, and hatred, and terribly apocalyptic ideas. The idea of unification exists, but it is not a plausible, palpable thing, except perhaps, on this piece of art.
This image of a burning flag is negative for the advancement of our country because it shows the disorder and disharmony that exists within it. It shows that people are unhappy with our government or with the direction in which our country is going. Whether it is a certain man from Texas, or a certain wife of a certain man from Arkansas, or even that certain man from Arkansas himself, people are unhappy with the government. It perhaps shows that democracy is ineffective, at least, for those who venture to burn flags, and they might prefer anarchy. It does not seem to me that having no government would help move our country along. I think Plato would look at this image and say that “the maker of the image knows nothing of true existence…” (A quotation directly from Book X of The Republic). He would look at those who burn flags and say that they do not truly understand what the government is exactly because it is just a representation of truth, and that with no government at all, the essence of government also disappears and therefore, would be completely chaotic.
4 comments:
I would first like to compliment you on your originality, most of us chose pictures glorifying nationalism or depicting patriotism towards a specific nation, however; you brought to light a notion superseding nationalism and that is the love of the human race. As simple as that image may appear, it truly is powerful—it excludes no peoples on earth an even lightens up the mood with an “under construction” sign in Africa. This is the best picture to convey the global village in which we live in today, there is truly no place on earth that can be called “remote” because of the accessibility and the different means available for travel and communication. This image with be in line with Plato’s view of progress because instead of recognizing an individual state, it comprehends the entire human race with no exclusion to any society. We may be caught up in war, hatred, and violence as a society; nevertheless, it is the first time by far that humankind has been so interconnected via communication systems and means of transportation.
I do not feel the need to expand much on your picture on flag burning because it is universally considered as an insult to the nation. The same goes for those who turn the flag upside down thinking they show their opposition to the current regime; it is those same people that fail to realize that the flag transcends the ruling faction and encompasses greater meaning than could ever be attainable by the government in place. Insulting the flag of a nation is equal to or if not proportionally greater to an insult to the entire nation.
I thought your first piece of art (the map) was absolutely perfect. I would never have thought of artwork promoting global unity, and I'm sure (as you mention) neither would Plato. However it fits perfectly into the idea of connecting a body of people through art. Plato's demand that only "good" art that promoted such values as unity, and power is definitely met in this piece. The power of man to connect the whole world despite land boundaries is impressive. The global community is not one that can be ignored, we will be stronger if we join together, I believe that the meaning of this piece is deeper than global transportation, and I think Plato would agree.
I used the burning flag as my negative image as well. You picked up on some ideas that I left out, I viewed it as disrespect rather than discontent. Anarchy indeed leads to chaos, and I'm sure Plato would agree with us on that point.
As I've already told you, I think the first picture is amazing. I would, however, like to make an additional observation. Although it does show how all our nations are connected and interdependent, it also reminds us the ways that we are not. There are still many divisions and differences that stop us from being so free and accessible to everyone. As to Plato, I'm also not sure how he'd react. He was very much a nationalist. He wanted his nation and his nation alone to be glorified and to be the best "Republic". If he felt that warring for whatever reason was natural I'm not quite sure that he would approve of a completely global community.
I really like the fact that your first picture is not blatantly obviously about patriotism or 9/11, like most of the other posts. I also think it is interesting that you choose a picture that represented a unified world, instead of a unified nation. Most of us chose a picture that promoted the smaller state, and for almost everyone that nation was America. I applaud your ability to think outside of the box.
However, I disagree with your analysis of what Plato would think of your first image. I really don't think that he would approve of this image. The image promotes world unity, and implies that every nation is connected, and every nation is equal. I doubt that Plato would like that idea. He was a firm believer in dictatorship and promotion of one state over the other. He probably believed that a nation should strive to be better than all the other nations, regardless of whether this ambition caused war and enemies. Plato probably would have approved of an unified, fragmented world for the greater good of the individual state.
Post a Comment