العودة   منتديات طلاب الجامعة العربية المفتوحة > منتديات المشرفين والمنتديات المساعدة > أرشيف المواد والمواضيع القديمة > A123b

موضوع مغلق
 
أدوات الموضوع انواع عرض الموضوع

قديم 23-05-2010, 05:17 PM   #99
eternity eternity غير متصل
مشرف سابق
 
الصورة الرمزية eternity
افتراضي


انا حبدأ مراجعه

تعبت من الكتب



====

اول شي

الي مو فاهم قصة لوحة مارات

شرح بالعربي

اقتباس:
عاصر الفنان الفرنسي ديفيد حقبة الثورة الفرنسية على الملكية حيث ولد في أوغسطس عام 1748, وكان مشاركا في تلك الثورة بطريقة مباشرة وما أغلب أعمالة إلا نقلاً لنبض الشارع الفرنسي لتلك الأحداث. كان الفنان أحد المصوتين على إعدام أخر الملوك الفرنسيين لويس السادس عشر وهذا يدل على قربة من الأحداث وتعدي دورة من مجرد التعاطف مع الثورة كما يروق ابعض المؤرخين وصفة. ولهذا السبب اتت تسميتة بـ ”رسام الثورة“ , حيث نجد بعض أشهر الأعمال على المستوى العالمي والمنتمية إلى مذهب الكلاسيكية المحدثة neoclassicism كانت من إنتاجاتة (سيتم إدراج بعضاً منها في هذة المشاركة).
رغم أن الثورة الفرنسية كانت بشكل عام تعبيراً عن مشاعر الشعب الفرنسي إلا أن البعض كان لا يزال يحمل الوفاء للأسرة المالكة وليس بالضرورة للنظام الملكي كنظام سياسي, وقد يعود السبب ان الملكية هي الأمان الوحيد لإستمرار الطبقة الإرستقراطية , وأحد أولئك المؤيدين للأسرة المالكة كانت زوجة الفنان ولذلك فقد تم الطلاق بينهما لهذا السبب!

التأييد للأسرة المالكة من لم يتخذ الطابع الفكري فقط بل تعداة إلا المحاولات المسلحة لإغتيال بعض المؤيدين للثورة, وقد أخذ الفنان عبء (او قل شرف ) تنظيم بعضاً من مراسم التشييع لمن أغتيل بسبب الثورة. وهذا ينقلنا إلى العمل المطروح حيث هو تصويراً لـ إغتيال صديق الفنان جين بول مارات jean-paul marat وهو طبيب وفيزيائي إلى جانب أنة كان محرراً في صحيفة ثورية كانت تؤيد الثورة والذي كان أحد المصوتين كذلك لإعدام لويس السادس عشر. وكردة فعل من أحدى السيدات من الطبقة البورجوازية المؤيدات للملكية وأسمها تشارلوت كوردي charlotte corday على تصويت مارات فقد أقدمت على إغتيالة وهو يغتسل كما هو واضح في العمل المطروح والسبب في وجودة في هذا المغتَسَلْ هو أنة كان يعاني من مرض جلدي يحتم علية دائما العمل وهو مغمور بالماء لإن ذلك يخفف من مما يعاني منة بسبب ذلك المرض!

تعتبر العمل المطروح واحداً من ثلاثة أعمال تصور نفس الموضوع تلك الأعمال هي :

The oath of the horatii, death of socrates, and brutus's sons


العمل المطروح هنا كما سبق هو "إغتيال مارتا" وقد يسميها البعض موت مارتا إلا أني احبذ ربطها بالسياق التاريخي.
أنتجها الفنان عام 1793 وليس 1739 (اعرف إنة خطأ مطبعي)
الخامة زيت على كانفس
128*162 سم
العمل موجود في musées royaux des beaux-arts, brussels

الفنان يعد من عباقرة المدرسة الكلاسيكية المحدثة, ولكن يجب التركيز على إبداع الفنان على مركز الإنتباة في العمل وهو رأس مارتا حيث أن جميع العناصر الموظفة في العمل تقود بشك أو بآخر عين المتلقي إلى ذلك الرأس بما يحملة من مشاعر مختزلة لإيمان شعب كامل وإصرارة على تحقيق حلمة بالحرية والديمقراطية حتى وإن كانت النهاية الموت من أجل الشعب ولنتأمل كسرة لقاعدة الظل بغية التركيز على مركز الإنتباة.
الجدير بالذكر أن العمل أنتج بناء عاى طلب العامة لتخليد ذكرى مارتا ولهذا فإنة الفنان أنتجة بسرعة ورغم ذلك فالعمل يعد من وجهة نظر مؤرخي الفن رمزاً للثورة الفرنسية.

بالتركيز على الورقة في يد مارتا نجد أسم السيدة التي إغتالتة, أراد الفنان إلى جانب تخليد مارتا كرمز للثورة أن يخلد السيدة التي قامت بالإغتيال كرمز للأ رستقراطية البغيضة!


اللوحة إحدى الأعمال الثلاثة السابقة الذكر والتي يسجل فيها الفنان موجة الإغتيالات السياسية في حقبة الثورة الفرنسية.


هي ببساطةإحدى أشهر أعمال الفنان والتي نراها في اكثر الكتب المهتمة بالفن , حيث تعد مرجعا أساسياً عند الحديث عن الكلاسيكية المحدثة.

منقول
التحليل الفني

اقتباس:

david, marat's colleague in the convention, had visited him only the day before the murder, and he recalled the setting of the room vividlly, the tub, the sheet, the green rug, the wooden packing case, and above all, the pen of the journalist. He saw in marat a model of antique "virtue." the day after the murder, david was invited by the convention to make arrangements for the funeral ceremony, and to paint marat's portrait. He accepted with enthusiasm, but the decomposed state of the body made a true-to-life representation of the victim impossible. This circumstance, coupled with david's own emotional state, resulted in the creation of this idealized image.


marat is dying: His eyelids droop, his head weighs heavily on his shoulder, his right arm slides to the ground. His body, as painted by david, is that of a healthy man, still young. The scene inevitably calls to mind a rendering of the "descent from the cross." the face is marked by suffering, but is also gentle and suffused by a growing peacefulness as the pangs of death loosen their grip. David has surrounded marat with a number of details borrowed from his subject's world, including the knife and charlotte corday's petition, attempting to suggest through these objects both the victim's simplicity and grandeur, and the perfidy of the assassin. The petition ("my great unhappiness gives me a right to your kindness"), the assignat marat was preparing for some poor unfortunate ("you will give this assignat to that mother of five children whose husband died in the defense of his country"), the makeshift writing-table and the mended sheet are the means by which david discreetly bears witness to his admiration and indignation.


the face, the body, and the objects are suffused with a clear light, which is softer as it falls on the victim's features and harsher as it illuminates the assassin's petition. David leaves the rest of his model in shadow. In this sober and subtle interplay of elements can be seen, in perfect harmony with the drawing, the blend of compassion and outrage david felt at the sight of the victim. The painting was presented to the coinvention on 15 november 1793. It immediately the object of extravagant praise; one critic claimed "the face expresses a supreme kindness and an exemplary revolutionary spirit carried to the point of sacrifice."



التعديل الأخير تم بواسطة eternity ; 23-05-2010 الساعة 10:39 PM
eternity غير متصل  
قديم 23-05-2010, 05:20 PM   #100
eternity eternity غير متصل
مشرف سابق
 
الصورة الرمزية eternity
افتراضي رد: نقاش الفاينل


قصة موت سقراط


اقتباس:

محاكمة سقراط

من كتاب اشهر المحاكمات

خمسمائة قاض وقاض جلسوا ، الواحد بجانب الاخر ، على المدرج ذي المقاعد الخشبية المغطاه بالحصر ، وفي مواجهتهم ، رئيس المحكمة محاطاً بكاتبه والحرس . وفي اسفل المدرج وضع الصندوق الذي سيضع فيه القضاه احكامهم بعد انتهاء المحاكمة . الجلسة علنيه . ولا يسمح فيها لغير الرجال بالحضور . في صباح من اصبحة ربيع عام 399 قبل الميلاد .


متهم اليوم شيخ ذو لحية بيضاء وثياب رثة . انه ابن النحات سوفرونيسك والقابلة فيلا ريت وهو الملقب بسقراط . لكن ما هي التهمة التي سيحاكم اليوم على اساسها؟ لقد اتهمه احد المواطنين ، ويدعى مليتوس ، بالكفر بالالهه وبادخال شياطين جديدة الى المدينة وافساد الشبية . وهي تهمة تستحق عقوبة الموت . ومن هو سقراط هذا ؟ انه رجل بلغ السبعين من عمره ، قبيح المنظر بعينية الجاحظين وانفعه الافطس ووجهة الممتلئ ناهيك عن ثيابه المهملة والمكونة من معطف صوفي لا ازرار له ولا حزام . وفوق كل ذلك ، فأنه لا يمشي الا حافي القدمين ، في الصيف كما في الشتاء . ولد سقراط في اثينا عام 469 ق .م في عائلة تعمل في النحت وعبثاً حاول ابواه تعليمه المهنة . كان لا يميل الا للحوار ومناقشة الاخرين حول مختلف المواضيع داعياً اياهم الى التفكير معه والتأمل . كان يجوب المدينة يتحدث الى المار ويستوقف الشباب يفقههم في امور الوجود وجوانب الحياة . واثينا في ذلك العصر من الديمقراطية ، كانت تعج بالفلاسفة ورجال السياسة. سقراط فكان يرفض بيع فكره كان يعتبر ان الفلسفة ممارسة عضوية ويومية ، وانها وبالتالي ، نمط حياة .

قرر القضاة أن يصوتوا بأنفسهم على نوع العقوبة ومستواها وصوتوا على أن يكون الحكم بالاعدام هو الجزاء الذي يجب ان يناله سقراط وذلك بأغلبية كبيرة . لقد اوقع الرجل نفسه في التهلكة بعد ان كان يمكنه ان ينقذها بتصرف اخر اكد للجميع انه يسعى للموت بكل رغبة وحماس .

مضى شهر على صدور الحكم . اما طريقة للتنفيذ فهي الاسهل من بين لائحة لا يخلو بعض بنودها من العنف : تجرع كمية من سم يحضر خصيصاً للمناسبة . خلال هذا الشهر . جاءه كريتون ، احد تلامذته المخلصين ، عرض عليه ان يقبل الهرب من السجن ، بعد ان يتدبر كريتون امر رشوة الحراس ، فرفض سقراط قائلاً بوجوب احترام العدالة وقوانينها ، حتى ولو كانت هذه القوانين جائزة .

تجمهر تلامذته في السجن ووصلت زوجته . وما ان رأته والحراس يفكون اصفاده تمهيداً للاعدام ، حتى اجهشت بالبكاء ونتفت شعرها ومزقت ثيابها:
- اه يا زوجي ! هذه اخر مرة تتكلم واخر مرة ترى فيها اصدقاءك ! .. تأثر سقراط وطلب اليها ان تذهب . ثم التفت نحو اصدقائه وبدأ يحدثهم ويتناقش واياهم في مواضيع مختلفة في الفن والموت والروح .... وبينما هو كذلك ، اذ بالجلاد يقاطعه :
- لا تتحرك كثيراً يا سقراط ، والا يفقد السم مفعوله وللمرة الاولى ينفعل سقراط ويقول للجلاد:
- لماذا لا تضع كمية مضاعفة ؟ هذه مهنتك .
وعاد الى التحدث مع تلامذته الذين لم يتمكنوا من اخفاء اعجابهم ودهشتهم . لقد استطاع هذا الانسان ان ينتصر على غرائزه وعلى مخاوفه . وعندما اقترب الوقت المخصص لتجرع السم ، دخل سقراط غرفة مجاورة ليستحم وهو يقول :
- اريد ان اوفر على النساء تنظيف جثة ميت . طال الاستحمام والجلاد ينتظر على الباب . ولما خرج سقراط ، اقترب منه الجلاد وفي يده كأس السم . قدمه اليه وقال له :
- سقراط اعرف انك لن تشتمني كما يفعل الاخرون . انت عاقل وتستطيع ان تتحمل قدرك .
- مرحى لك ! هيا . ماذا علي ان افعل ؟
- لا شئ سوى خطوات قليلة بعد التجرع . وعندما تشعر بثقل في ساقيك ، عليك ان تستلقي والباقي يتولاه السم نفسه .
وتناول سقراط الكأس وتجرعه دفعة واحدة بكل هدوء . لم يتمالك تلامذته مشاعرهم فانفجروا يجهشون بالبكاء مثيرين غضب المعلم :
- ماذا تفعلون ؟ لقد أمرت زوجتي بالرحيل حتى لا أرى ما يشبه مظاهر الضعف هذه أريد ان أموت بصمت الخشوع . فتمالكوا مشاعركم .
وصمت الجميع فوراً . بعدها استلقى سقراط كما اشار جلاده . وجاء الجلاد يقيد رجليه ويقول له :
- هل تشعر بشيء؟
- كلا
وطفق الجلاد يشرح للحاضرين ان الموت يصل الى القلب بعد تبلغ البرودة الرجلين والبطن.
وعندما شعر سقراط بهده البرودة تصل الى بطنه ، اشار الى تلميذه المخلص كريتون بالاقتراب ليقول له بصوت ضعيف :
- كريتون ، في ذمتنا ديك لا يسكولاب . ادفع له ثمنه دون نقاش .
- حاضر يا سيدي . هل تريد شيئاً اخر ؟
لم يجب سقراط . لقد اغمضت عيناه ...
" ديك لايسكولاب " انها لا شك عبارة اراد بها سقراط التهكم على اله الطب . لم يوفر سخرياته على الالهة ، حتى وهو على وشك ان يموت ! وما الموت بالنسبة له ؟ اليس هو التحرر ؟ اليس الشفاء من مرض هو الحياة ، كما كان يردد دائماً ؟

هذه الجمله التي قالها سقراط قبل موته ، والتي تمثل التشاؤم الهادئ والساخر بأبرز معانيه ، كانت عبارة رسالة من اول رجل أعدم في التاريخ بسبب افكاره .

منقول

التحليل الفني



اقتباس:
the first impression is that this picture shows sadness and anxiety. The men shown are in deep sorrow and denial

socrates was not chained, that was very important to him since he resemble freedom.

Even the guard was sad, he looks like he is crying since his hand is over his eyes. He is dressed in flashing red, the color of blood and death. Socrates wife has no hear since she had pulled it out and she had ripped her clothes. Socrates had send her away. He want to see no sing of weakness, he just wants to die in peace.
the colors of the painting are flashing. David followed the neoclassical style when painting it. Socrates is dressed in white the color of honesty and cleanliness. The source of light is from an estimated window in the ceiling.





for months, david and his friends debated and discussed the importance of this picture. It was to be another father figure (like the horatii and brutus), unjustly condemned but who sacrifices himself for an abstract principle. by contrasting the movements of the energetic but firmly controlled socrates, and his swooning disciples, through the distribution of light and dark accents, david transforms what might have been only a fashionable picture of martyrdom to a clarion call for nobility and self-control even in the face of death.here the philosopher continues to speak even while reaching for the cup, demonstrating his indifference to death and his unyielding commitment to his ideals. Most of his disciplines and slaves swirl around him in grief, betraying the weakness of emotionalism. his wife is seen only in the distance leaving the prison. only plato, at the foot of the bed and crito grasping his master's leg, seem in control of themselves.

for contemporaries the scene could only call up memories of the recently abandoned attempt at reform, the dissolution of the assembly of notables in 1787, and the large number of political prisoners in the king's jails or in exile. ((this is very important))david certainly intended this scene as a rebuke to cringing souls. On the eve of the revolution, this picture served as a trumpet call to duty, and resistance to unjust authority. Thomas jefferson was present at its unveiling, and admired it immensely. Sir joshua reynolds compared the socrates with michelangelo's sistine ceiling and raphael's stanze, and after ten visits to the salon described it as `in every sense perfect'

التعديل الأخير تم بواسطة eternity ; 23-05-2010 الساعة 05:30 PM
eternity غير متصل  
قديم 23-05-2010, 05:41 PM   #101
noooor777 noooor777 غير متصل
طــالب
 
الصورة الرمزية noooor777

 











افتراضي رد: نقاش الفاينل


ياريت احد يحطلنا اهم التعاريف اللي صادفتكم بالدراسة
بلييييز
واشكر الجميع على الجهود في هذا الملف كتييير افدتوني بالمراجعة للاختبار
noooor777 غير متصل  
قديم 23-05-2010, 05:42 PM   #102
eternity eternity غير متصل
مشرف سابق
 
الصورة الرمزية eternity
افتراضي رد: نقاش الفاينل


اقتباس:
the oath of the horatii.

david’s oath of the horatii was painted in 1785, oil on canvas. We can’t estimate the visual impact that paintings and other artwork had in bringing about political awareness. The subject mater of these painting served to conscientise and encourages people in different ways. The subject of this painting dealt with the horatii brothers showing their loyalty to the state by searing on oath on their swords to either die or win the war for their state.

historically, this painting occupies an extremely important place in the body of david's work and in the history of french painting. It was commissioned by the administrator of royal residences in 1784 and exhibited at the 1785 salon under the title the oath of the horatii, between their father's hands. The story was taken from titus-livy. We are in the period of the wars between rome and alba, in 669 b.c. It has been decided that the dispute between the two cities must be settled by an unusual form of combat to be fought by two groups of three champions each. The two groups are the three horatii brothers and the three curiatii brothers. The drama lay in the fact that one of the sisters of the curiatii, sabina, is married to one of the horatii, while one of the sisters of the horatii, camilla, is betrothed to one of the curiatii. Despite the ties between the two families, the horatii's father exhorts his sons to fight the curiatii and they obey, despite the lamentations of the women. Even the strong roman arches in the background that seems to be a stage background echoes the sadness of the women and children. The pictorial space reminds us as though the event is taking place on a stage, in a play. Space is limited; it is cut off by the colossal roman arches. The perspective lines on the floor serve to take our eyes into the painting.

politically, these figures of the brave men are well located in the foreground of the painting. They are strong and powerful gigures full of energy and determination. They are symbols of masculine strength. The most dramatic moment is shown, the very moment that the oath is being taken. This most intense moment been depicted was the hallmark of dvid’s art. These men are leaving behind their families, children and wife, as seen in the right hand corner. These weeping women and children will probably not see their husbands or sons again. The message is clear: Be loyal to your country, sacrifice your life if needs be. Stop being selfish.

artistically, the decor is reduced to a more abstract order, that of architectural space--massive columns, equally massive arches, opening out onto a majestic shadow. The three archways loosely correspond to the three groups. The contemplative atmosphere is softened by shades of green, brown, pink, and red, all very discreet. The colors serve to increase the sadness and seriousness of what’s happening in the painting. Light seem to come in from the front – focusing especially on the weeping, limp women. Colors are thus neutral, earth colors that do not distract our attention from the main event. Instead of opening his painting out onto a landscape or an expanse of sky, david closes it off to the outside, bathes it in shadow. As a result, the light in this setting takes on a brick-toned reflection, which encircles his figures with a mysterious halo. Men keep on serious expressions of determination and loyalty as contrasted to the ladies and children who seem to be weeping, sad and very worried. Men are majestic and as strong as the arches in the background while the women are more worried that their husbands may not return alive.

philosophically, this painting served to inspire the general public and promoted a sense of patriotism. Like rousseau, david too emphasizes the importance of the general will rather than the particular will. These patriotic brothers put aside their individual wills and collectively does what is best for the state. Through david's rigorous and efficient arrangement, the superior harmony of the colors, and the spiritual density of the figures, this sacrifice, transfigured by the oath, becomes the founding act of a new aesthetic and moral order. He consciously intended it to be a proclamation of the new neoclassical style in which dramatic lighting, ideal forms, and gestural clarity are emphasized.

conclusion
this painting certainly served to promote the spirit of loyalty, the rejection of selfishness and spread unity so that more men will be prepared to fight for their state. It gives a clear and precise message in visual terms. This source was perhaps more effective than rousseau’s writing to those who were illiterate.

انا حدرس هاللوحات

وطبعا بروتوس ولوحة الواجب

والله يستر وتيجي لوحة سهلة

: )

التعديل الأخير تم بواسطة eternity ; 23-05-2010 الساعة 05:53 PM
eternity غير متصل  
قديم 23-05-2010, 06:01 PM   #103
eternity eternity غير متصل
مشرف سابق
 
الصورة الرمزية eternity
افتراضي رد: نقاش الفاينل


اقتباس:
“Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains”

This ringing slogan from Rousseau’s first chapter of The Social Contract was used to explain the change that took man from living in the state of nature and unlimited freedom to living in the civil state and its laws.

Why should such a change occur? What are its assumed benefits and what can render it legitimate

اقتباس:
The above quotation comes from the first chapter of The Social Contract (1762) in which Rousseau explains the move from the state of nature to the civil state. Man has unlimited freedom in the state of nature. This may sound very tempting; however, the right to own everything means ownership of nothing as everything is owned by everyone. In the state of nature, the rule of the jungle applies whereby power decides ownership.

Laws and regulations need to be devised to protect freedom and the right of ownership. Thus, the need to move away from living in the state of nature to living in the civil state becomes necessary in order to preserve one's rights and freedom. However, if man decides to live in a civil state, he is forsaking his unlimited freedom in the hope of gaining more benefit from the civil state. This inevitably means that we need laws to make us free. The unlimited freedom of the state of nature is really very limiting since in reality, one is not free to own anything.

The social contract is the agreement between the individual and the state whereby the individual enters into a contract in which he abides by the laws of the state, and these laws in turn will protect him. If the laws are chains on the individual then there is a conflict between the individual’s particular will and the state’s general will. Here the problem of legitimacy arises. The will of the state should represent the will of all its citizens. Individuals should know what is best for the state and forsake their individual particular wills in order to adopt the general will of the state, which is in the interest of the individual. If they can do this, then the state’s authority is legitimate because in obeying the general will of the state, individuals are really only obeying themselves.

In order for the chains that control the actions of the individual to become legitimate, the individual must adopt the general will of the state so that his particular will is the same as the state’s general will. Rousseau’s line of thinking is as follows:
· The particular will is the product of appetite
· The general will is the product of reason
· To act on appetite is slavish and bad
· To act on reason is noble and good
· We should be noble and good
· We should obey the general will

If individuals put aside their particular wills and think instead according to the general will, there would not be a clash of wills. What the individual wants and what the state wants would be the same. In this way, man can live in a state and yet remain free.

eternity غير متصل  
قديم 23-05-2010, 06:03 PM   #104
eternity eternity غير متصل
مشرف سابق
 
الصورة الرمزية eternity
افتراضي رد: نقاش الفاينل


اقتباس:
Look at Colour Plate 39, The Lictors Returning to Brutus the Bodies of his Sons, 1789 in your Illustration Book. Write an essay in which you discusshow it could be argued that this painting by Jacques-Louis David reflects thespirit of the French Revolution politically,Rousseau's ideas philosophically and the cultural andsocial climate artistically.
اقتباس:
Politically, this painting could be connected to an especially active year during the period leading up to the French Revolution in 1789. Brutus could stand as a parallel to the revolutionaries, both known for rousing oratory skills, or as a parallel to the National Assembly in his opposition to the King (The Roman King Tarquin whom Brutus opposed and took an oath to overthrow could stand in for the tyrant Louis XVI against whom the National Assembly took an oath demanding a constitution.) This painting fits into a growing politicization of art, where art seems to reflect the social, cultural and political moods of the populace. It also represents David’s own growing revolutionary activities. The painting seems to be the beginning of David’s revolutionary status (ending of course with his becoming first painter to Napoleon). But, it also reflects the social, cultural and moral values of the time which seem to have nourished the painting. The painting reflects and is perhaps shaped by the ideas and values of Rousseau and became a vehicle for expressing revolutionary views in visual form, such as the idea that heroism entails putting the interests of the state and society ahead of those of the individual. The painting seemed to appear at the right moment of the people’s dissatisfaction with the monarchy, and Brutus became a revolutionary symbol.Philosophically, the point of the focus David creates is to draw a sharp contrast between the group of women in the painting and Brutus. Brutus displays the heroic, desired reaction, and represents the sacrificing stoicism of the classical ideal which Rousseau saw as the necessary feature of persons who go through a remarkable change when faced with political transformation. Brutus sits in the left foreground in a chair, under a statue symbolizing Rome, tensely holding a piece of paper, which seems to be the letter that proves the pro-royalist treason of his two sons, a treason incited by their mother’s family; their mother now stands mourning her two sons, executed by an order of their anti-royalist father, the magistrate. The Lictors, who obey the order of the magistrates, are now returning the bodies of the two sons. David imagined this moment (since Brutus actually attended his sons’ execution) and presented it in a painting. This imagined moment dramatized the contrast between political duty and family allegiance. Political duty to the state is the more important here, embodied in the figure of Brutus. He acts with reason, courage, steadfastness and thinks of the general will and the good of the state rather than with his emotions, instinct and family affairs. He is ennobled in the face of this serious, testing and extreme experience. Artistically, this painting can be seen as fitting into the neoclassical artistic movement of the time. David’s choice of a Roman character not only had many precedents but was actually commissioned and requested frequently by the government. The themes of heroism, nobility and bravery were especially demanded. David might simply be following a well-established artistic tradition in France at the time of dealing with subjects from Greek and Roman history (as well as the Bible or mythology). This was called “Grand Art” or “Grand Style.” Such art was supposed to be morally uplifting and intellectually challenging. The “Grand Manner” in which it was painted was supposed to be reflected in style (smooth brushwork, rich drapery and Roman or Greek architecture) as well as subjects who demonstrated noble thoughts and feelings during serious or significant experiences. The painting classicizes moral concerns. Although the painting follows closely traditional classical techniques, David provoked surprise and criticism in the way that the painting deviates from certain aspects of the classical style: the difference between the background and foreground is too stark and abrupt; the hero is placed in the dark rather than in the spotlight, and the major characters are separated (Brutus and his wife and daughters). Hence, the painting lacks the typical harmonizing effect of the classical style which would aid in seeing the painting as a whole rather than seeing it as made up of discrete elements or spaces. This lack of harmony, created by the painting’s formal features, such as colour contrast, lighting and angle of vision, helps the viewer focus on discreet groups. Firstly, the illusion of depth and dimensionality created by perspective lines in the tiles of the floor, the bricks and the tops of the columns, are extended towards a vanishing point right above the standing women’s heads. These lines immediately draw our vision towards them, especially as the horizontal lines and the head-on angle of vision create the effect of making the viewer feel as if he/she is standing at a similar height to and parallel with the tall female figure. The effect of backstage and front stage, created by the curtain and perspective lights, make the women appear closer to us, as if they are the center of a dramatic staged event. Ultimately, the female group’s viewpoint and reactions become the central focus. The use of light and colour also draws our focus to the group of huddled women. Although there is light on the columns, the chair and the feet of Brutus, the spotlight effect is on the group of standing women; they are brought into sharp relief in contrast with the dimmer background and surroundings. The contrast between the colours of the women’s clothes and everyone else’s, as well as the colours of the columns and curtains create a contrast between oranges/reds and blues/greys, between warm and cool colours. This also has the effect of placing the women in focus and in also making them appear closer; although Brutus is actually in the foreground, the huddled standing women in the middle ground appear closer to us, and are the first thing we see when we look at the painting. It seems that all of these formal elements come together to make the focus the tragic reaction of the women in contrast to the sombre stoicism of Brutus. David, then, uses contrast and separation to highlight the difference between family loyalty, particular will, emotionalism and weak sentimentality as represented by the women on the one hand, and stoicism, reason, loyalty and obedience to the state and the general will as represented by Brutus on the other.


طبعا هالجواب جدا طويل

المهم افهموا المحتوى واكتبوا بطريقتكم
eternity غير متصل  
قديم 23-05-2010, 06:04 PM   #105
eternity eternity غير متصل
مشرف سابق
 
الصورة الرمزية eternity
افتراضي رد: نقاش الفاينل


اقتباس:
John Stuart Mill has been accused of promoting a “new kind of paternalism.” First, explain what Mill’s own views on paternalism are, then discuss on what grounds Mill could be accused of this. Begin with a definition of paternalism
اقتباس:
Paternalism is “a policy or practice of treating or governing people in a fatherly way, especially by providing for them without giving them rights or responsibilities" (The American Heritage College dictionary). Any definition given by the student should include the idea of one group governing another group and/or one group treating another group as a parent would treat his/her child. Any such definition would suffice.

Paternalism is based on the premise of the superiority of one group and the inferiority of the opposed group. Accordingly, aristocrats would be seen as being superior to the working classes. Mill also believes that paternalism is based on a wrong assumption: the poor, argues Mill, should be protected from the rich, not protected by them. Aristocracy and social hierarchy are fed by the paternalistic view of society. Mill believes that evil resides in power, and in order to eradicate the evil, power must be withdrawn. The aristocrats will try to maintain the status quo--i.e. their power, so how could they be entrusted with the protection and representation of the working classes? On similar grounds, Mill opposes paternalism with regard to the relationship between men and women. Man, as the powerful party would want to maintain his superior position; thus, he is not the appropriate candidate for representing or protecting the rights of women.

Mill expounds a theory of “self-dependence,” whereby workers or women become the judges of their own interest and relate to the other party on an equal basis. The worker or woman should be independent, but this independence must be matched by education.

It is interesting to note that while Mill heavily attacked the paternalistic view of society inside England, he justified this view in the ordering of the British dependencies. Since Mill worked with the East India Company for some years, he was also looking after his interest despite his strong belief in equality. In this case, he was only representing himself, and this just goes to prove that the powerful cannot represent the weak.

The above practical case is clearly paternalistic, but Mill could also be accused of paternalism theoretically, especially in his emphasis on education as a condition for voting. This, as Mill’s opponents argue, would devolve the power from the aristocracy only to bestow it upon the educated middle classes. The working classes would still be left out of the power game. It is a matter of musical chairs. In fairness to Mill, however, his education-based “meritocracy,” as labelled by his opponents, is not a permanent status since the working classes can and should be educated. Education is open to all, not only to the middle classes.
eternity غير متصل  
قديم 23-05-2010, 06:07 PM   #106
eternity eternity غير متصل
مشرف سابق
 
الصورة الرمزية eternity
افتراضي رد: نقاش الفاينل


اهم نقاط الوحدة 22 & 23

اقتباس:
unit 22, 23: Representation of the people towards democracy

1832: There were two groups that cannot vote, don't have the right to vote "suffrage":
1. Working class
2. Women
they don't take part in the election

1832: Reform act
only who have an income 10 pounds of the household "families" can vote.

1867: Working class men had given the right to vote.

1918: After the end of the 1st world war, the women were given the right to vote, but only in local elections.

Mid-victorian: 1930s, 1940s, 1950s
suffrage: Right to vote حق الاقتراع

in order to get information in a debate:
1. Writing of politicians
2. Women's right advocate

1983: Bill "law" is introduced: Charter العريضة
chartist movement: 1930s – 1940s

they asked for election reform: Asked for the vote for all adult men.

Chartist movement includes:
1. Intellectual, upper-class, aristocrats
2. Poor, unemployed, criminals

they were respectable & moderate معتدلين: "exploitation of children" استغلال الأطفال

unfortunately they faced suppression قمع, violent عنف, some of the chartist were hanged, and most of them were transport to australia as a criminals 1834. That was the period of martyrs عصر الشهداء.
Or they might not be a members of union لا ينتموا إلى النقابات or practicing secret oath أحزاب سرية.
(fear of revolution)

1851: Middle class "labor class" exhibition of watershed to the people apprehensive الطبقة العاملة أبدت فهم وإدراك الوضع.
Working people were respectable + moral they also have national pride.
John stuart mill (js mill): 1850 was an intellectual (radical) متطرف
he was a member of upper-class + intellectual.


He said society look at the manual labor "working classes" or "blue color" in two ways:

1. Paternalist: نظرة أبوية
natural hierarchy: Natural dependent, working class depend on upper-class like children who depends on their parents, or employees depends on their employers.
The children / employees must obey their parents employers, they should sever them, they should be grateful.
The parents should protect their children, employers protect employees.

2. Self-dependent: Working class
social hierarchies are unnecessary and immoral, employer don't protect the employees, they exploit them.
Employees should be protected from their employers.


Samuel smiles: 1859 was no radical, he was conservative
he used to give lectures to the youth.

Self-help: He wanted the working class to vote
• you have to improve yourself
• you can't achieve anything you should improve yourself by your own.
• the working classes shouldn't listen to people who try to tell them that they need to take political action.
• you have to work hard in:
- industry
- frugality
- temperance
- honesty

samuel smile stress on:

• individual freedom
• self-reliance
• he reject revolutionary claims
• government institution shouldn't be change.

Two conceptions of government:

Q: To what extent are forms of government a mater of choice?

There are two views of government
1. Mechanistic 2. Naturalistic

1. Mechanistic: (mill)
• government means to an end
• government is a man made
• people are en-charge they are the sovereign
• government is the problem معادلة
• define the purpose which government required "why people put this government?" "what form of government best fit?"
liberal: Free trade, industrial towns/cities

2. Natural: (mill & smile)
• government is like a tree
• we adapt we have to change
• yourself: Not collective change, not government change, individual change
• we should accurate ourselves. تعريف النفس
conservative: Aristocrat, countryside, social order (spontaneous product) عفوي

women

the right of the women to vote:
1. Divorce
2. Work
3. Education
4. Property
5. Suffrage

working class women not involved in the debate because they can't express themselves.

John ruskin:
• essentialism الجوهرية
• ruled by certain biology sexual difference
• she belong in the domestic/private/sphere/inside
• men public/political/sphere/outside

js mill
• women are sexual different
• equal
• granted all right which granted to men

according to taylor's argument:
1. Circular logic "no convincing reason"
2. No opportunities
3. Cause become a reason

florence nightingale (wrote a book "cassandra")
1. Women's problems:
2. Women are idle الإمرأة لا قيمة لها
3. No spiritual or emotional development
4. Busy-ness (empty business – lead to lack of growth intellectually / politically).
5. Can't be serious
6. Result: Nervous disorder (stress, hysteria, schizophrenia مرض نفسي)
eternity غير متصل  
قديم 23-05-2010, 06:23 PM   #107
eternity eternity غير متصل
مشرف سابق
 
الصورة الرمزية eternity
افتراضي رد: نقاش الفاينل


اقتباس:
Discuss the theme of equality in George Bernard Shaw’s play Pygmalion. How is this theme dealt with in terms of gender?
اقتباس:
The student can argue either that George Bernard Shaw is indeed a feminist or a male chauvinist. Allow for arguments on both sides of the spectrum for [truth] is in the eye of the beholder.

Shaw makes Eliza defy men with her daunting "I am a good girl, I am" echoed repeatedly throughout the play. Here Eliza is defying societal expectations of young women in her position. Shaw's feminism is not only shown in the character of the defiant and feisty flower girl but also in the character of Higgins' mother, who does not approve of her son's behaviour. Mrs. Higgins rejects the way men view women. She tells Higgins and Pickering that they are babies playing with a "live doll." Mrs. Higgins' outburst "Oh, men! men!! men!!!" at the end of Act Three (p.168) also emphasizes Shaw's dissatisfaction with the doll like image of women. Mrs. Higgins' anger is cleverly shown increasing in intensity with the gradual addition of exclamation marks. Mrs. Higgins' anger parallels Eliza's feminist rage, which is clearly shown in the scene where Eliza throws Higgins' slippers in his face. This represents quite a remarkable reversal in Eliza's poor girl servant attitude, but somehow the reader is not really surprised because Eliza possesses a defiant spirit at the outset of the play. Shaw is also true to his feminism when he refuses to end the play with the traditional marriage of the hero and heroine. Allowing for a marriage between Higgins and Eliza would mean that Shaw has succumbed to the conventions of society which he has set out to question. Higgins is a domineering character and would definitely dominate in a marriage with Eliza. In this case, Eliza would have been put back into her "proper" place so to speak. This, of course, would have meant that Shaw was denying any form of equality between men and women, in addition to maintaining that a woman's place was in the home. By allowing Eliza to marry Freddy in the "epilogue," however, Shaw is indeed reversing the situation between men and women and turning things upside down in his usual style. Freddy would be fetching Eliza's slippers, not vice versa. Surprisingly, it is Higgins who sounds the ultimate feminist call in the play when he tells Eliza in Act Five, "I think a woman fetching a man's slippers is a disgusting sight: did I ever fetch your slippers? I think a good deal more of you for throwing them in my face. No use slaving for me and then saying you want to be cared for: who cares for a slave?" (p. 100). While Higgins vocalizes these thoughts in the play, it is hard to imagine him actually putting them into practice in a marriage with Eliza, for example. She would forever be fetching his slippers.

Another interesting point to consider is that Eliza's supposed reformation comes at the hands of men. It does not come from within. Higgins claims in Act Five: "By George, Eliza, I said that I'd make a woman of you; and I have" (p. 104). Both Higgins' and Pickerings' attitudes presuppose woman under the male gaze. Is there a counter argument provided in the play? Can anybody dispute Higgins' claim? Arguing that it is not Higgins who changes Eliza, but Pickering, who treats her like a lady and teaches her self respect, does not put an end to the debate. Pickering is as much of a man as Higgins; the creator is still male, whether the artist shaping the doll/sculpture is the gentle Pickering or the harsh Higgins. Shaw's chauvinism is clear—only man can reform woman. We are back to where we started; without man, there is no woman. So, is Shaw really calling for the equality of women in Pygmalion?
eternity غير متصل  
قديم 23-05-2010, 06:39 PM   #108
eternity eternity غير متصل
مشرف سابق
 
الصورة الرمزية eternity
افتراضي رد: نقاش الفاينل


اقتباس:
Why is Rousseau considered “the philosopher proper” of the French Revolution? Refer to relevant ideas in the Social Contract and show how these ideas influenced the revolutionaries.
اقتباس:
Suggested Answer and Marking Emphasis:

This question, by its very nature, requires an emphasis on:

1) Rousseau's political philosophy (esp. the legitimacy of authority)
2) Some historical detail of the French Revolution

The student should point out that the French revolutionaries found the emphasis on "reason and clear moral principle" important to their cause, especially as authority was based on tradition in pre-revolutionary France (i.e. the hereditary French monarchy). Rousseau's ideas emphasized reason, not tradition. The difference between one man and another should, in this case, be based on what Rousseau calls "public utility": "Civil distinctions, therefore, can be founded only on public utility." According to this argument, a person "who was a brilliant military tactician" would be in charge of the army, and not someone who was the brother of an important person. Likewise, authority should also be based on "public utility," not heredity. These ideas certainly sounded convincing to the poor of Paris before the French Revolution in 1789, especially as their deprived position in society would remain so under the rule of the French monarchy.

A very important idea which probably fueled public sentiments against the French monarch or sovereign is Rousseau's idea of the legitimacy of authority. Authority, in isolation, is to "command others to do things." However, having the right to command depends upon following the general will of the state. In a republic, then, the general will prevails over the particular will, and the sovereign here is not one person, but the people as a whole. Rousseau's concept of the general will guarantees what is best for the state as a whole. If individuals put aside their particular wills and think instead according to the general will, then what the individual wants and what the state wants will be the same. Hence, the problem of legitimacy will not arise because people's individual wills and the will of the state are the same.

In this case, the government's authority would be considered legitimate, which was not the case in pre-revolutionary France where the general will of the state had to succumb to the will of the French monarch. Rousseau's political philosophy helped to fuel revolutionary fervour and his famous slogans, such as "Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains" were often quoted during the time of the French Revolution that overthrew the monarchy in France.
eternity غير متصل  
قديم 23-05-2010, 07:22 PM   #109
smart tutaa smart tutaa غير متصل
طالب جديد
 
الصورة الرمزية smart tutaa

 










افتراضي رد: نقاش الفاينل


الله يخليكم احد يشرح لي
الرايتنق وان رايتنق
قبل الساعة 12 حيفصل النت
smart tutaa غير متصل  
قديم 23-05-2010, 07:34 PM   #110
فرح سعادة فرح سعادة غير متصل
مشرف سابق
 
الصورة الرمزية فرح سعادة
افتراضي رد: نقاش الفاينل


هناك نوعين من المصطلحات المتعلقه بكلمات المصدر

Witting means intentional

Unwitting means unintentional

يعني الكلمات الي في المصدر هل يقصدها الكاتب والا مايقصدها ؟؟ كتبها في وقت غضب مثلا او يريد رسالته تلقى قبول فيحط الفاظ لها معاني مؤلمه ؟؟

فيه شي مرتبط بالمعاني ايضا الموجوده بالمصدر ويسمى

Elucidation means terms need to be explained and identified.

بمعني ثاني احيانا الواحد يصادف كلمات مايفهمها ومايفهم وش يقصد الكاتب بها

وعندها نريد توضيح عن معاني الكلمات هذي ؟

واخر شي لازم نفهمه هو

اهم شي التطبيق الموجود في الانشطه الي في الكتاب لانها تجي مثلها واحيانا نفسها بالامتحان

فممكن تجينا اسئله تتعلق ب نقاط الضعف والقوة فشلون نطلعها ؟؟

اذا لقينا خلل في سؤال من الاسئله الي نطرحها لتحليل المصدر معناته نقاط ضعف او لقينا تضارب في المعلومات الي داخل المصدر

لكن ان شفنا كل شي تمام وكامل وخاصه في اسئلة التحليل لو كان واحد بس يعتبر نقطة قوه..

منقول
فرح سعادة غير متصل  
قديم 23-05-2010, 09:17 PM   #111
LoLo1989 LoLo1989 غير متصل
طــالب
 
الصورة الرمزية LoLo1989

 











افتراضي رد: نقاش الفاينل


no nshallah btnja7e w nos

بنات & شباب :
- درست تعاريف الثورة الفرنسية الي مجمعينها في المنتدى .
-درست روسوا بس انه فهمته فهم مع حفظ النقاط اللي بدها حفظ و بعض التعاريف
-حفظت الجلوسري اللي بعد روسوا
-درست الرسومات الـ 4بروتس + هوراتي + سقراط + مارت ...
-ميل + سمايلز شو بدهم يعني شو نظرية كل حدا منهم و بـس
-المسرحية فهمتها فهم يعني ما درست شي منها بس فهمتها
-تعاريف اللي ورا المسرحية .

هــــــــادا بيـكـفـــي أو نــــو ...............!!!

في شي زيادة أنا ناسيته .......................؟؟

التعديل الأخير تم بواسطة LoLo1989 ; 23-05-2010 الساعة 09:18 PM



التوقيع

لا يـوجـد انـسـان ضـعـيـف ،، و لـكـن يـوجـد انـسـان يـجهـل فـي نـفـسه مـواطـن الضـعـف ...
LoLo1989 غير متصل  
قديم 23-05-2010, 09:29 PM   #112
sugarheart sugarheart غير متصل
طــالب
 
الصورة الرمزية sugarheart

 











افتراضي رد: نقاش الفاينل


اعتقد ده كل المطلوب باقي بس قراءة الدعاء ده
اللهم إني أستودعك ما قرأت و ما حفظت و ما تعلمت فرده عند حاجتي إليه إنك على كل شئ قدير.

بالتوفيق للجميع ان شاء الله
sugarheart غير متصل  
موضوع مغلق

مواقع النشر (المفضلة)

أدوات الموضوع
انواع عرض الموضوع

تعليمات المشاركة
لا تستطيع إضافة مواضيع جديدة
لا تستطيع الرد على المواضيع
لا تستطيع إرفاق ملفات
لا تستطيع تعديل مشاركاتك

BB code is متاحة
كود [IMG] متاحة
كود HTML معطلة

الانتقال السريع


الساعة الآن 12:04 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1, Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. TranZ By Almuhajir
جميع المواضيع والمشاركات تعبر عن وجهة نظر أصحابها
ولا تعبر باي شكل من الاشكال عن وجهة نظر منتديات AOUA
تصميم وتطوير : التكنولوجيا الماسية