After Reading The Beholding Eye by D.W. Meinig and hearing about it in lecture, I thought about the idea of “landscape as a habitat.” Most of us have family far away from school, which means some of us have had experiences taking flights. When we look through an airplane window, we can see that humans have altered almost everything, and it is fairly easy to see the way in which humans have shaped the landscape to fit their needs, adhering to the idea of landscape as a habitat. Humans have created many bridges, roads, and buildings to make the Earth “home of the man.” I think this is easily seen when flying, and it seems so natural that we sometimes forget that the landscape has been altered for the benefit of humans.
Like you said, seeing mankind's affect on the natural land can be easily seen from the bird eye's view that airplanes provide us. The grid system that we discussed about a couple of weeks ago can also be seen from an airplane window. The grid system alone is proof of man's mark on nature and our efforts for further development of the land.
In yesterday’s lecture, we talked about bird’s eye views and how they have a narrative like quality. The quote Professor Kaplan mentioned from the reading assignment by Alex Krieger, immediately reminded me of a lookout point in San Francisco that gives a beautiful view of the city. Standing on top of the hill you overlook the grid-like residential neighborhoods, and the skyscrapers in downtown. And like Professor Kaplan said, being separated from the city’s hustle and bustle is definitely calming. But I think this bird’s eye view tells a story about San Francisco’s urbanization and growth. In areas that were under construction for years when I was a child, there are now completed buildings, office spaces, and parks. While some part of the city will always under construction, seeing that from a bird’s eye view, shows me that the city is always changing and moving forward.
I agree with this. The view at Twin Peaks, which is what I believe you're referring to, certainly reflects concepts in the American landscape that we've talked about. The grid-like structure of the busy streets and tremendous buildings is so distinctive of the city, as well as American cities and towns as a whole. The city of San Francisco is so diverse and has such a rich history that is reflected in the bird's eye kind of view that you get on top of Twin Peaks. You see the buildings and roads conform to the rolling hills, the city blocks on a grid, and the contrast between the contemporary and aged buildings. The bird's eye type of view that you take in at Twin Peaks is incredible, and you can learn a lot about the city just by admiring the ethereal view.
I totally agree with you. Whenever I'm in San Francisco I always hope to go to the highest peak in order to get the best views. I've always appreciated how different viewpoints (like Twin Peaks vs. the top of the Downtown Hyatt) can give you different perspectives of the history of the city's creation, and how parts of San Francisco were used so differently in the past.
There really is something magical about an aerial view, it's what makes Ferris Wheels my favorite ride at the fair. A lot of places are famous for the spectacular views they offer such as the Eiffel Tower or the Space needle.
I prefer being a few stories above ground though. When you are about 3 stories up you can look out a window and see the "big picture" and a lot of small details at the same time. You can monitor people traffic but still see individual people.
It's fun seeing how people interact. Like you can see somebody's body language, people getting impatient while they wait in line. You see clusters of people, like a group of people walking slowly together and talking while people by themselves try to maneuver themselves past the cluster of people because they are walking faster. It's also fun to guess what people are talking about (or imagining they are saying something really silly).
When you are near the top of a Ferris Wheel you can see different individuals, like a mom and dad keeping an eye on their kids playing a rigged carnival game, the couples going on dates, the rowdy packs of middle schoolers.
You can look at the big picture (like "that ride seems really popular"), or you can focus in on small details (like "that guy forgot to zip his backpack").
I agree with you, this could also be applied with Grizzly Peaks in Berkeley. Aerial views could also show some bad as well. In Grizzly peaks and the Campanile in UC Berkeley, when one looks towards San Francisco, it is notable that the city of San Francisco has a lot pollution .
During Professor Kaplan's lecture about birds eye view and how they can "sell" or advertise the city reminded me of a particularly famous birds eye view of my home, Los Angeles. This is bird view is the as be utilized in photograph and movies as a expression to say "this is Los Angeles". Standing on the balcony of the observatory one can see the the near prefect symmetry of the grid within the city. Another aspect of this birds eye view of the flatness of the Los Angeles landscape. One can see Downtown, the Palo Verdes peninsula, and the Santa Monica Pier. All of these major aspects and hot spots when trying to advertise the city of Los Angeles.
I too have noticed how major cities such as Los Angeles use birds eye view to advertise the city in photography and movies. I believe the expression you mentioned, “this is Los Angeles”, comes from the fact that birds eye view really emphasizes how big the city it. Birds eye view gives the viewer sensation that there is so much going on in the city that you need to be in the air to see it all. Thousands of lights, cars, roads, and buildings highlight all the different activities and lives going on every moment. It makes the city look beautiful and exciting.
I thought about my hometown after this lecture as well. I live near San Fransisco and recently watched a vimeo that had to do with the views around Marin County. It is so easy to get a feeling of the natural sublime when looking at things from above. I wonder why... maybe it is because it makes us feel much more insignificant and small.
Today in lecture we talked about hot air balloons and how people were obsessed with the innovation that allowed people to go up into the air. Professor Kaplan mentioned how everyday objects had pictures of hot air balloons on them as more and more people became amazed at and took pride in the invention. This reminded me of the Albuquerque balloon festival that is held every year. It is the largest hot air balloon event in the world. My grandmother went to the festival last year, and she brought me back a pair of socks that had hot air balloons all over them. This is just like the picture the professor had in the lecture of the pair of shoes with a hot air balloon imprinted on them. I think it is really interesting that over a hundred years after the invention of the hot air balloon, people still are amazed by them and travel from all over the world to attend the Albuquerque festival and see hundreds of them in the air. This shows that the hot air balloon really was an extremely important innovation and people are still obsessed with them.
I agree with what you said about the obsession people have over hot air balloons, and it's impact on life today. In fact a friend also gave me a pair of hot air balloon socks, though I'm not sure where they're from. I think this obsession can even be seen in amusement parks, like Six Flags, as they have hot air balloon designed rides, and like Professor Kaplan said, in many county fairs!
During lecture today, we discussed the history of ballooning and the how the ability to view from the air drastically changed maps and landscapes as well as it’s usefulness in areas such as war. I was fascinated by how similar the history, practices, and timeline of the hot air balloon was to that of the airplane.
Just like the hot air balloon, the airplane was created with the purpose of gaining new perspective and to travel far distances in a short amount of time. Similar to how a crowd of people gathered to watch the Montgolfier brother’s fly the first unmanned hot air balloon, crowds also watched the Wright brothers and other experimenters fly their creations in amazement.
As we discussed in class, the first manned hot air balloon flight was during late 1783. Just 10 years later, the hot air balloon was sent to the battlefield for the first time during the Battle of Fleurus in 1794. The balloons first military use was to observe the movements of the Austrian army. Similarly, by the time Wright Brothers aircraft was capable and fully controllable in 1905, airplanes were used in World War I also exactly 10 years later as well, in 1915. The first purpose of the military aircraft? Was “focused on reconnaissance, in particular gaining a bird’s eye view of the battle field.” Eerily similar.
These similarities prove that around the world we as humans all have the same drive to gain new perspective and to push the limits of exploration not only for transportation but also to understand and view the world differently than how we do from the ground. I believe this is why maps and photographs taken from a hot air balloon were so popular during the time period we discussed in lecture.
We have now reached the age where airplanes are a safe, reliable, and heavily used method of transportation. Within the past few years, companies and agencies such as Space X and NASA are heavily researching and testing commercial space flight. History has clearly repeated itself already, so are spacecraft’s our era’s “ballooning”?
Growing up, I lived in a very small, woodsy town near the ocean in the North Bay Area. As a child, I never really noticed the layout of the streets. As I've grown up, and moved to Davis, I've started to notice in detail how unique the layout of my hometown actually is. In Fairfax, there are so many hills that it's nearly impossible for there to be a complete grid system. I live on the top of a big hill, where everyone gets lost trying to use directions to get to my house. But everything in Davis seems so much easier. The grid of downtown makes it so simple to find out where I need to go. Each street is simply numbered and lettered, and everything downtown is where it seems like it should be. I grew up without a grid system, and because of that, I feel like I've gained a better sense of direction throughout my childhood because of my need to not simply rely on maps to find my destination. Even though Davis has such a simple lay out, I still find it off-putting to get around sometimes.
I think I feel a similar way about grid systems and way finding. Though my reasons are slightly different, I also see the simplicities in the grid system, and also the complications. I have always had a knack for getting hopelessly lost, even when things are laid out so specifically; I'm terrible at remembering the correct paths to go down. However, if I know where I'm supposed to end up, I can find it if I wander around enough because of the way things are laid out.
Today in lecture, Professor Kaplan talked about geoglyphs, or earthworks. These are ancient aerial views usually pertaining to a meaning or message. On my recent trip to San Francisco, I visited the Land’s End Labyrinth, a popular tourist site to view the golden gate bridge. At the end of the trail there is a large rock formation in the ground. Before walking down to it, we view it from a tall cliff, making it look similar to a bird’s eye view. I have always wondered who created this piece of art and why? Professor Kaplan emphasized that the creators purpose was to send a message. Is there a hidden message the artist of this rock formation wants to tell us? Or even, how long has it been there? This fabulous land art portrays an ancient feel, which leads tourists to believe that it has been there for a long time. With my sudden curiosity I did some research and found that it was created in 2004 by Eduardo Aguilera. It might not be ancient, but it still represents a smaller form of a geoglyph trying to tell a story.
Whenever I think about seeing things from above, my mind goes straight to the times where I had the window seat on an air plane. It's really easy to understand Thomas Baldwin's fascination with birds eye views in those moments. Everything does look different like he noted, such as rooftops and other noticeable landmarks. One of my favorite things is when you are over a city at night, and even though it's dark, the building lights still show how a city is laid out, usually using the grid system that was talked about in lecture. I think it is interesting to notice that such a fascination with looking at views from above has transcended so many years, and that people still have that admiration even though the methods of viewing such a sight has changed drastically due to newer technologies.
I think this is one of the things I can relate to. It's amazing how one can see all these things from above. Although I have never been on an airplane at night, I can definitely notice how different everything is from above. I can see why everyone started developing such a fascination for bird's eye views!
This is what I also thought of the most during the lecture on bird's eye view. It's crazy how different and still everything looks from above. My house is actually right next to an airport so when I take the plane at that airport a lot of the times I can see my house when we takeoff, and it gives me a whole new perspective to see my house and my neighborhood like that. Even though it's a view that I see often using google maps, it's really different when I see it myself in person. It makes me think of how amazing it was for the first people who went up in hot air balloons because not only were they seeing their hometowns from such a different perspective, but they were also in the open air to get this perspective.
As I was scrolling through my Instagram feed a few days ago, I stopped on a post that one of my best friends posted. Her post was of a beautiful Santa Cruz sunset. The picture reminded me of the discussion during lecture and in discussion section about landscapes. Instead of quickly double tapping to like her post and continue scrolling through my feed, I took a minute to really reflect upon the discussion we had about landscapes. This sunset picture clearly fit the definition of a landscape with its single viewpoint and depiction of an expanse of rolling green hills and beach in the distance. In my opinion, this sunset is beautiful, but in Ways of Seeing by John Berger, everyone sees this sunset landscape in a different light based on what we know and have experienced. Throughout my childhood and even until now, I had the privilege of traveling to many countries and places around the world. Traveling opened up my eyes to the beauty of the world and has taught me that something as universal as a sunset, is different in every location, and is always a beautiful sight to see.
When looking at the picture of the sunset, I viewed this landscape as an aesthetic, which was one of the ten different views of landscapes mentioned in "The Beholding Eye: Ten Versions of the Same Thing" by D.W. Meinig. Because I come from an artsy background, I was paying more attention to the saucy colors in the skyline, the smooth transitions from the warm to the cool colors, the angle at which the photo was taken, the texture of the clouds and grass, and the two thirds rule for placement of a focal point in the picture. But my view is probably much different from another person who viewed this same post. Someone else may have seen this sunset landscape and defined it as a place, Santa Cruz. Others may have viewed this picture as nature or a habitat. Our views vary due to personal knowledge, experience, and the relationship we create with our sight. Sight is such an interesting sense because everyone can see the same thing, but interpret and describe the sight differently.
I thought it was interesting that you thought of your friend's post like that. When I see a view like that, I always try to imagine myself there and see what they're seeing. I think that because you've traveled a lot and seen so different scenery, it affects how you see things compared to people who haven't. I personally haven't traveled much, so I cant compare it to anything I've seen in person but rather a picture I saw online. It's nice that you come from an artsy background because you can use the different views and apply that to current projects you're working on. I agree with you about viewing the landscape as an aesthetic because that's usually the first thing I think of when I see a landscape.
Throughout the course of this quarter we have talked a lot about aerial views and viewing the world from above. I am from Marin County and there are a lot of beautiful places where you can get above the everyday hustle and bustle and see the world from a calmer, higher standpoint. After looking at the images provided on the slides in class I was immediately reminded of a view in my hometown. The long drive uphill is worth the amazing view and clarity. From the top you can see individual buildings, my high school, the hospital, the rival high school, the bay leaking into Kentfield, San Quentin, and even the Richmond Bridge. This advantage viewpoint gives us a new perspective and can even show us aspects of the grid systems. When standing at this spot, the different patterns in roads and the homes that lay on them become much more evident. The information we have learned so far has taught me a lot about taking in my surroundings and that I can learn a lot from appreciating the world around me.
I agree with you, I think its very important to stop for a minute and appreciate the world around us. Every once in a while when I'm walking I try to realize where I'm walking, look around and understand what I'm looking at.
The other day, the professor went over the grid view. That lecture stood out to me. I don't think I have ever seen the grid view in person, even though I've been on planes. I've seen pictures of it and it shows up a lot of television. I always thought that it was pretty cool how there was lines throughout the fields, but it never occurred to me how they got there. I didn't put any thought as to why they were there, or if it was simply nature's doing. After the lecture on the grid view, I understood more about those "lines in the fields" and why they were put there. It was really interesting to see the history of how the grid views came to be. I also like the idea behind the grid views, that everyone deserves a fair part in making their own "American dream." The teacher explained that these grids were an iconic American landscape, and that made me realize that these kinds of grids often aren't seen anywhere else.
I agree with this. I have been on planes a lot and the grid is one of those things you just kind of don't think about but is always present. I never really thought about how it came to shape, because I just accepted it was there and never thought about it further. It was interesting to learn how unique these are to America and how they came to be.
This quarter we talked about the sublime and the different aspects of it, as well as how its evolved over time. It got me thinking about the many trips I've taken in the United States to different famous places like Yosemite and Grand Canyon. I especially thought about my trip with my family to the Grand Canyon as this trip was the most recent. When I saw the Grand Canyon for the first time it was mind-blowing, and I have no words to describe it. It was sublime, but even sublime doesn't accurately describe it. It made me think about how these places aren't meant to be described, but experienced. It's the old cliche about how you "just have to see it, because it can't be described through words". When reading about the American sublime, I read that the sublime had been increasingly commercialized and crowded as it became a shared experience. Many people may see this as a bad thing as though America had tainted the sublime with its presence, but I think the shared experience is when the American sublime is all about. I thought about how after we experience something like the sublime, we always tell people we know that they should go see what we saw. Eventually a chain occurs and many, many more people go check out those places of sublime. I think these shared experiences are what makes the American Sublime American. We gain national pride and unity through the sharing of these places and the shared experiences of the sublime.
I totally agree with you. Many things that I have seen, whether they were natural or man-made, have been so shockingly beautiful. Just like you said, that isn't even a good description because there is just no way to describe it. I love telling people about the places and I encourage them to see them for themselves and experience the sublime.
This last lecture talked about hot air balloons and its different uses. I was surprised hot air balloons weren’t first intended for the view of an area. Seeing something like this used in military and a way to measure the air pressure wasn’t something I could have thought of, but it makes sense. When soldiers see this massive floating thing in the air, I’d assume it could be uses as a weapon or something that stores supplies. Instead, it was just used as a distraction since the balloon was so massive it had to be anchored to the floor. Now a days, hot air balloons are used as a source of enjoyment. I’ve thought of going into a hot air balloon and traveling around the city. I saw posts about a couple having their first date on a hot air balloon on Snapchat and that made me think of what was talked about in lecture. I know it would be an amazing experience because of the view, but there are also things that scare me as well. From the reading, many people died because of the weather causing the balloons to crash. I thought this could happen to me as well since at times the weather can change at any instances. I’ve learned the uses of the hot air balloon has evolved by so much since it was first invented, as well as how it is still relevant now after so many years.
I totally agree, learning about why hot air balloons were invented was surprising. I have always dreamed about riding in one as well, especially after I saw the movie, Around the World in 80 Days. They might seem scary, but I think nowadays you can trust that you won't blow away. Also, I think the view will be worth it. The fact that air balloons have evolved from being used for battle to being used for leisure today, is definitely fascinating.
In lecture, the professor talked about Panorama, which is a 360 degree unbroken view of an entire surrounding area. This reminded of the first time that I learned about the panoramic photo on my iPhone. I wanted to capture this photo of me with a lake and forest area in the background. I wasn't too sure that using the panorama feature was going to help, but I was shocked when I saw the results of it. In panoramic photos, it gives a whole new view, and a new perspective to the photo. When the professor talked about the room that had the panoramic painting spinning, and people would go see as a leisure activity, I was very intrigued. I was just imagining being there, and I wish I could experience it.
I absolutely love panoramas, they capture so much. Especially if its a big picture on the wall, its like you are watching a movie or reading a book, as you walk from one side to the other, there is a story that is being told.
When Professor Kaplan talked in lecture about how big of a deal the birds eye view was when it was first introduced it made me think how it's something that, today, we take for granted. I've seen a lot of views from above, like when I hike or take a plane. Even just using google maps for uber rides provides us with a birds eye view. I can't imagine how strange it must've been for people at first when they had never seen their city or their area from above. It's hard to picture a world where a map or a bird's eye view is a new concept. I can't imagine how incredible it must've been for the first people to go up in a hot air balloon, or how terrifying it must've been to be in a battle and see the other side show up with something you've never seen before floating in the sky. When Professor Kaplan showed in lecture the picture of the village that a failed hot air balloon landed in I can't even begin to imagine how much it would've caused alarm. Not only was it something new, but no one had ever seen anything other than animals flying in the sky. It really put perspective on how we take a lot of our modern-day technology for granted.
A really great example of this that isn't necessarily dealing with maps is the film "Arrival of a Train at La Ciotat" by The Lumière Brothers from 1895. Rumor has it that this short clip of literal train arriving at a station was first shown to an audience that jumped out of their seats and feld because they thought the train was going to burst through the screen and hit them. This is considered the first motion picture and was shown to an audience that had literally never experienced anything like it before as it was less an invention by the Lumiere brothers and more of an experiment. We especially take technology for granted because we grew up smack in the middle of the technological revolution in which advancements are expected on a yearly basis as tech companies out compete one another.
Both in readings and in class, we've been asked to question what is considered a "map" and what is a landscape as we traditionally think of them as purely geographical or a work of art. Yet, as we've seen, maps and landscapes exist on more of a spectrum both in form, subject, content, and artistry. Recently, I was scrolling through Twitter and I came across this most that really took me aback and made me reconsider where I wanted to go with my map project. Whoever created the map had photographed their nude body in black and white and then used color paint to mark where other people had touched them. They included things such as touches from their parental unit, friends, lovers, and, most strikingly, a category marked by red paint: "somebody I told no". That hit hard and, though the other categories urge the viewer to recall similar often meaningful moments, this one specifically demands attention in its color, the placement of the paint, and the subject, being sexual assault and rape. I was struggling with the idea of a map dealing with a social issue and kept reverting to a situation from last quarter in my Native American studies class in which the professor asked anyone with digital imaging skills to render a more informative map of the Standing Rock site and the proposed path of the Dakota access pipeline that could be sent to news outlets. These photos I came across really made the idea that maps are more than what we think of traditionally and that, additionally, maps and landscapes exist on a spectrum as this project was both a map and a landscape of a human body.
D.W. Meinig's piece about the ten ways landscape may be interpreted caught my attention the most. As a film major, when viewing a film, the first frame a viewer sees is an establishing shot. This shot is for the most part is a view of the scenery/landscape of nature or a city. The landscape sets the setting until the camera either zooms in close to a certain spot or the scene switches to a new one completely. I'm mentioning this part of film because as I was reading "Ten Versions of the Same Scene", I was struck with the idea that the way one sees landscape could definitely change the initial feelings towards the film the viewer is watching. For example, the 2015 film Cinderella the establishing shot is of a meadow before a house where the main character's parents are enjoying their day. The scenery is lit up brightly with wild flowers everywhere and a small house in the background. In another establishing shot in the same film, the audiences sees the landscape from up above and once again the house is there, but this time it is engulfed by it and the lighting is darker. From Meinig's ten versions you could take nature, artifact, and place. The landscape as nature version plays well because in these two establishing shots there is an emphasis on what is surrounding the house and not the house itself. Sure the house stands out as out-of-place, but the vibrancy comes from the scenery itself. Landscape as artifact comes in because of the house that stands out in the scenery of the shot, "the mark of man... nature [providing] a stage." Through this version, nature is diminished somewhat and now the house is what is the center of attention. For landscape as place, the establishing shot does this by makes the home look safe among the forest it is place in. The article says, "it is a view which suggests... a well-cultivated sense of place is an important dimension of human well-being." In other words, there is a sense of security within the shot--- the way the forest seems to hug the house, almost in a protective manner. In conclusion, the way we see landscape and the way we choose to interpret it, could vastly change the way one feels about shots in film as is the case with the scene in Cinderella (2015).
*I am re-posting this because i did not post it on the correct page of the blog the first time*
Blog Assignment #1
Ryan Blanc This post refers to the map that was handed out in the first day of the Monday discussion session
This map shows the Dakota Pipeline, a controversial ongoing project. It seems like the Trump administration wants to push the project forward, claiming it will create American jobs. This map shows information about the history of Sioux native Americans. It addresses a problem, it shows the environmental impact a pipeline would have if it was built as well as conflicts between local police and native Americans. This map is great for informing people about the Dakota Access pipeline Controversy.
This map shows “moments of injustice” and “injustice via water manipulation”. This map does not show topographical information, information about the weather, flora, fauna, and other important details to get a full picture. This Maps excludes a lot of the good things it would bring, such as a couple of jobs for Americans, how much it would help American companies. For the record I don’t think we should build it, but this map only include information showing negative effects from the pipeline.
Obviously for a 2-dimensional map you are limited to how much information can be presented. This map focuses on arguing the negative impacts a pipeline could bring and highlights existing injustice towards native Americans. The title of the map is The Dakota Pipeline in Context, the title of the map tells a lot about what the map maker Is trying to convey. This is the context the person who made this map wants us to see it in. If the Oil Company’s made a map with the same title, it would probably show profit margins and job creation, and completely leave out social injustice.
I am going a bit back in time where I went to Rome during my study abroad in Florence, Italy. I absolutely loved Rome when I went there, and wished I had more time to spent there even though I was there I think 2 or 3 days. Still, that is not enough. Anyways, I saw so many amazing landmarks, and found them on my own (walking). One on the landmarks did give me a hard time though, I just could not find it and that was Trevi Fountain. I tried to so hard not to get my phone out looking for it, but the paper map just did not help. So here I am, thankfully there were a lot of tourists around so I felt safe, but I was stubborn to ask for help in finding the fountain. So here I am pretending to text on my phone but at the same time trying to find that fountain. The streets were so crowded and narrow, and the signs were so hard to see, and some signs I could not find at all. How this story ends is that I finally found the fountain, and it had a plastic wall around it, for construction, but there was still a place to throw the coin in. I did, and I am hoping to go back, find it, and hopefully the construction on the fountain would not be happening.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAfter Reading The Beholding Eye by D.W. Meinig and hearing about it in lecture, I thought about the idea of “landscape as a habitat.” Most of us have family far away from school, which means some of us have had experiences taking flights. When we look through an airplane window, we can see that humans have altered almost everything, and it is fairly easy to see the way in which humans have shaped the landscape to fit their needs, adhering to the idea of landscape as a habitat. Humans have created many bridges, roads, and buildings to make the Earth “home of the man.” I think this is easily seen when flying, and it seems so natural that we sometimes forget that the landscape has been altered for the benefit of humans.
ReplyDeleteLike you said, seeing mankind's affect on the natural land can be easily seen from the bird eye's view that airplanes provide us. The grid system that we discussed about a couple of weeks ago can also be seen from an airplane window. The grid system alone is proof of man's mark on nature and our efforts for further development of the land.
DeleteIn yesterday’s lecture, we talked about bird’s eye views and how they have a narrative like quality. The quote Professor Kaplan mentioned from the reading assignment by Alex Krieger, immediately reminded me of a lookout point in San Francisco that gives a beautiful view of the city. Standing on top of the hill you overlook the grid-like residential neighborhoods, and the skyscrapers in downtown. And like Professor Kaplan said, being separated from the city’s hustle and bustle is definitely calming. But I think this bird’s eye view tells a story about San Francisco’s urbanization and growth. In areas that were under construction for years when I was a child, there are now completed buildings, office spaces, and parks. While some part of the city will always under construction, seeing that from a bird’s eye view, shows me that the city is always changing and moving forward.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this. The view at Twin Peaks, which is what I believe you're referring to, certainly reflects concepts in the American landscape that we've talked about. The grid-like structure of the busy streets and tremendous buildings is so distinctive of the city, as well as American cities and towns as a whole. The city of San Francisco is so diverse and has such a rich history that is reflected in the bird's eye kind of view that you get on top of Twin Peaks. You see the buildings and roads conform to the rolling hills, the city blocks on a grid, and the contrast between the contemporary and aged buildings. The bird's eye type of view that you take in at Twin Peaks is incredible, and you can learn a lot about the city just by admiring the ethereal view.
DeleteI totally agree with you. Whenever I'm in San Francisco I always hope to go to the highest peak in order to get the best views. I've always appreciated how different viewpoints (like Twin Peaks vs. the top of the Downtown Hyatt) can give you different perspectives of the history of the city's creation, and how parts of San Francisco were used so differently in the past.
DeleteThere really is something magical about an aerial view, it's what makes Ferris Wheels my favorite ride at the fair. A lot of places are famous for the spectacular views they offer such as the Eiffel Tower or the Space needle.
DeleteI prefer being a few stories above ground though. When you are about 3 stories up you can look out a window and see the "big picture" and a lot of small details at the same time. You can monitor people traffic but still see individual people.
It's fun seeing how people interact. Like you can see somebody's body language, people getting impatient while they wait in line. You see clusters of people, like a group of people walking slowly together and talking while people by themselves try to maneuver themselves past the cluster of people because they are walking faster. It's also fun to guess what people are talking about (or imagining they are saying something really silly).
When you are near the top of a Ferris Wheel you can see different individuals, like a mom and dad keeping an eye on their kids playing a rigged carnival game, the couples going on dates, the rowdy packs of middle schoolers.
You can look at the big picture (like "that ride seems really popular"), or you can focus in on small details (like "that guy forgot to zip his backpack").
I agree with you, this could also be applied with Grizzly Peaks in Berkeley. Aerial views could also show some bad as well. In Grizzly peaks and the Campanile in UC Berkeley, when one looks towards San Francisco, it is notable that the city of San Francisco has a lot pollution .
DeleteDuring Professor Kaplan's lecture about birds eye view and how they can "sell" or advertise the city reminded me of a particularly famous birds eye view of my home, Los Angeles. This is bird view is the as be utilized in photograph and movies as a expression to say "this is Los Angeles". Standing on the balcony of the observatory one can see the the near prefect symmetry of the grid within the city. Another aspect of this birds eye view of the flatness of the Los Angeles landscape. One can see Downtown, the Palo Verdes peninsula, and the Santa Monica Pier. All of these major aspects and hot spots when trying to advertise the city of Los Angeles.
ReplyDeleteI too have noticed how major cities such as Los Angeles use birds eye view to advertise the city in photography and movies. I believe the expression you mentioned, “this is Los Angeles”, comes from the fact that birds eye view really emphasizes how big the city it. Birds eye view gives the viewer sensation that there is so much going on in the city that you need to be in the air to see it all. Thousands of lights, cars, roads, and buildings highlight all the different activities and lives going on every moment. It makes the city look beautiful and exciting.
DeleteI thought about my hometown after this lecture as well. I live near San Fransisco and recently watched a vimeo that had to do with the views around Marin County. It is so easy to get a feeling of the natural sublime when looking at things from above. I wonder why... maybe it is because it makes us feel much more insignificant and small.
DeleteToday in lecture we talked about hot air balloons and how people were obsessed with the innovation that allowed people to go up into the air. Professor Kaplan mentioned how everyday objects had pictures of hot air balloons on them as more and more people became amazed at and took pride in the invention. This reminded me of the Albuquerque balloon festival that is held every year. It is the largest hot air balloon event in the world. My grandmother went to the festival last year, and she brought me back a pair of socks that had hot air balloons all over them. This is just like the picture the professor had in the lecture of the pair of shoes with a hot air balloon imprinted on them. I think it is really interesting that over a hundred years after the invention of the hot air balloon, people still are amazed by them and travel from all over the world to attend the Albuquerque festival and see hundreds of them in the air. This shows that the hot air balloon really was an extremely important innovation and people are still obsessed with them.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you said about the obsession people have over hot air balloons, and it's impact on life today. In fact a friend also gave me a pair of hot air balloon socks, though I'm not sure where they're from. I think this obsession can even be seen in amusement parks, like Six Flags, as they have hot air balloon designed rides, and like Professor Kaplan said, in many county fairs!
DeleteDuring lecture today, we discussed the history of ballooning and the how the ability to view from the air drastically changed maps and landscapes as well as it’s usefulness in areas such as war. I was fascinated by how similar the history, practices, and timeline of the hot air balloon was to that of the airplane.
ReplyDeleteJust like the hot air balloon, the airplane was created with the purpose of gaining new perspective and to travel far distances in a short amount of time. Similar to how a crowd of people gathered to watch the Montgolfier brother’s fly the first unmanned hot air balloon, crowds also watched the Wright brothers and other experimenters fly their creations in amazement.
As we discussed in class, the first manned hot air balloon flight was during late 1783. Just 10 years later, the hot air balloon was sent to the battlefield for the first time during the Battle of Fleurus in 1794. The balloons first military use was to observe the movements of the Austrian army. Similarly, by the time Wright Brothers aircraft was capable and fully controllable in 1905, airplanes were used in World War I also exactly 10 years later as well, in 1915. The first purpose of the military aircraft? Was “focused on reconnaissance, in particular gaining a bird’s eye view of the battle field.” Eerily similar.
These similarities prove that around the world we as humans all have the same drive to gain new perspective and to push the limits of exploration not only for transportation but also to understand and view the world differently than how we do from the ground. I believe this is why maps and photographs taken from a hot air balloon were so popular during the time period we discussed in lecture.
We have now reached the age where airplanes are a safe, reliable, and heavily used method of transportation. Within the past few years, companies and agencies such as Space X and NASA are heavily researching and testing commercial space flight. History has clearly repeated itself already, so are spacecraft’s our era’s “ballooning”?
http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/wars_airwar.html
Growing up, I lived in a very small, woodsy town near the ocean in the North Bay Area. As a child, I never really noticed the layout of the streets. As I've grown up, and moved to Davis, I've started to notice in detail how unique the layout of my hometown actually is. In Fairfax, there are so many hills that it's nearly impossible for there to be a complete grid system. I live on the top of a big hill, where everyone gets lost trying to use directions to get to my house. But everything in Davis seems so much easier. The grid of downtown makes it so simple to find out where I need to go. Each street is simply numbered and lettered, and everything downtown is where it seems like it should be. I grew up without a grid system, and because of that, I feel like I've gained a better sense of direction throughout my childhood because of my need to not simply rely on maps to find my destination. Even though Davis has such a simple lay out, I still find it off-putting to get around sometimes.
ReplyDeleteI think I feel a similar way about grid systems and way finding. Though my reasons are slightly different, I also see the simplicities in the grid system, and also the complications. I have always had a knack for getting hopelessly lost, even when things are laid out so specifically; I'm terrible at remembering the correct paths to go down. However, if I know where I'm supposed to end up, I can find it if I wander around enough because of the way things are laid out.
DeleteToday in lecture, Professor Kaplan talked about geoglyphs, or earthworks. These are ancient aerial views usually pertaining to a meaning or message. On my recent trip to San Francisco, I visited the Land’s End Labyrinth, a popular tourist site to view the golden gate bridge. At the end of the trail there is a large rock formation in the ground. Before walking down to it, we view it from a tall cliff, making it look similar to a bird’s eye view. I have always wondered who created this piece of art and why? Professor Kaplan emphasized that the creators purpose was to send a message. Is there a hidden message the artist of this rock formation wants to tell us? Or even, how long has it been there? This fabulous land art portrays an ancient feel, which leads tourists to believe that it has been there for a long time. With my sudden curiosity I did some research and found that it was created in 2004 by Eduardo Aguilera. It might not be ancient, but it still represents a smaller form of a geoglyph trying to tell a story.
ReplyDeleteWhenever I think about seeing things from above, my mind goes straight to the times where I had the window seat on an air plane. It's really easy to understand Thomas Baldwin's fascination with birds eye views in those moments. Everything does look different like he noted, such as rooftops and other noticeable landmarks. One of my favorite things is when you are over a city at night, and even though it's dark, the building lights still show how a city is laid out, usually using the grid system that was talked about in lecture. I think it is interesting to notice that such a fascination with looking at views from above has transcended so many years, and that people still have that admiration even though the methods of viewing such a sight has changed drastically due to newer technologies.
ReplyDeleteI think this is one of the things I can relate to. It's amazing how one can see all these things from above. Although I have never been on an airplane at night, I can definitely notice how different everything is from above. I can see why everyone started developing such a fascination for bird's eye views!
DeleteThis is what I also thought of the most during the lecture on bird's eye view. It's crazy how different and still everything looks from above. My house is actually right next to an airport so when I take the plane at that airport a lot of the times I can see my house when we takeoff, and it gives me a whole new perspective to see my house and my neighborhood like that. Even though it's a view that I see often using google maps, it's really different when I see it myself in person. It makes me think of how amazing it was for the first people who went up in hot air balloons because not only were they seeing their hometowns from such a different perspective, but they were also in the open air to get this perspective.
DeleteAs I was scrolling through my Instagram feed a few days ago, I stopped on a post that one of my best friends posted. Her post was of a beautiful Santa Cruz sunset. The picture reminded me of the discussion during lecture and in discussion section about landscapes. Instead of quickly double tapping to like her post and continue scrolling through my feed, I took a minute to really reflect upon the discussion we had about landscapes. This sunset picture clearly fit the definition of a landscape with its single viewpoint and depiction of an expanse of rolling green hills and beach in the distance. In my opinion, this sunset is beautiful, but in Ways of Seeing by John Berger, everyone sees this sunset landscape in a different light based on what we know and have experienced. Throughout my childhood and even until now, I had the privilege of traveling to many countries and places around the world. Traveling opened up my eyes to the beauty of the world and has taught me that something as universal as a sunset, is different in every location, and is always a beautiful sight to see.
ReplyDeleteWhen looking at the picture of the sunset, I viewed this landscape as an aesthetic, which was one of the ten different views of landscapes mentioned in "The Beholding Eye: Ten Versions of the Same Thing" by D.W. Meinig. Because I come from an artsy background, I was paying more attention to the saucy colors in the skyline, the smooth transitions from the warm to the cool colors, the angle at which the photo was taken, the texture of the clouds and grass, and the two thirds rule for placement of a focal point in the picture. But my view is probably much different from another person who viewed this same post. Someone else may have seen this sunset landscape and defined it as a place, Santa Cruz. Others may have viewed this picture as nature or a habitat. Our views vary due to personal knowledge, experience, and the relationship we create with our sight. Sight is such an interesting sense because everyone can see the same thing, but interpret and describe the sight differently.
I thought it was interesting that you thought of your friend's post like that. When I see a view like that, I always try to imagine myself there and see what they're seeing. I think that because you've traveled a lot and seen so different scenery, it affects how you see things compared to people who haven't. I personally haven't traveled much, so I cant compare it to anything I've seen in person but rather a picture I saw online. It's nice that you come from an artsy background because you can use the different views and apply that to current projects you're working on.
DeleteI agree with you about viewing the landscape as an aesthetic because that's usually the first thing I think of when I see a landscape.
Throughout the course of this quarter we have talked a lot about aerial views and viewing the world from above. I am from Marin County and there are a lot of beautiful places where you can get above the everyday hustle and bustle and see the world from a calmer, higher standpoint. After looking at the images provided on the slides in class I was immediately reminded of a view in my hometown. The long drive uphill is worth the amazing view and clarity. From the top you can see individual buildings, my high school, the hospital, the rival high school, the bay leaking into Kentfield, San Quentin, and even the Richmond Bridge. This advantage viewpoint gives us a new perspective and can even show us aspects of the grid systems. When standing at this spot, the different patterns in roads and the homes that lay on them become much more evident. The information we have learned so far has taught me a lot about taking in my surroundings and that I can learn a lot from appreciating the world around me.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you, I think its very important to stop for a minute and appreciate the world around us. Every once in a while when I'm walking I try to realize where I'm walking, look around and understand what I'm looking at.
DeleteThe other day, the professor went over the grid view. That lecture stood out to me. I don't think I have ever seen the grid view in person, even though I've been on planes. I've seen pictures of it and it shows up a lot of television. I always thought that it was pretty cool how there was lines throughout the fields, but it never occurred to me how they got there. I didn't put any thought as to why they were there, or if it was simply nature's doing. After the lecture on the grid view, I understood more about those "lines in the fields" and why they were put there. It was really interesting to see the history of how the grid views came to be. I also like the idea behind the grid views, that everyone deserves a fair part in making their own "American dream." The teacher explained that these grids were an iconic American landscape, and that made me realize that these kinds of grids often aren't seen anywhere else.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this. I have been on planes a lot and the grid is one of those things you just kind of don't think about but is always present. I never really thought about how it came to shape, because I just accepted it was there and never thought about it further. It was interesting to learn how unique these are to America and how they came to be.
DeleteThis quarter we talked about the sublime and the different aspects of it, as well as how its evolved over time. It got me thinking about the many trips I've taken in the United States to different famous places like Yosemite and Grand Canyon. I especially thought about my trip with my family to the Grand Canyon as this trip was the most recent. When I saw the Grand Canyon for the first time it was mind-blowing, and I have no words to describe it. It was sublime, but even sublime doesn't accurately describe it. It made me think about how these places aren't meant to be described, but experienced. It's the old cliche about how you "just have to see it, because it can't be described through words". When reading about the American sublime, I read that the sublime had been increasingly commercialized and crowded as it became a shared experience. Many people may see this as a bad thing as though America had tainted the sublime with its presence, but I think the shared experience is when the American sublime is all about. I thought about how after we experience something like the sublime, we always tell people we know that they should go see what we saw. Eventually a chain occurs and many, many more people go check out those places of sublime. I think these shared experiences are what makes the American Sublime American. We gain national pride and unity through the sharing of these places and the shared experiences of the sublime.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with you. Many things that I have seen, whether they were natural or man-made, have been so shockingly beautiful. Just like you said, that isn't even a good description because there is just no way to describe it. I love telling people about the places and I encourage them to see them for themselves and experience the sublime.
DeleteThis last lecture talked about hot air balloons and its different uses. I was surprised hot air balloons weren’t first intended for the view of an area. Seeing something like this used in military and a way to measure the air pressure wasn’t something I could have thought of, but it makes sense. When soldiers see this massive floating thing in the air, I’d assume it could be uses as a weapon or something that stores supplies. Instead, it was just used as a distraction since the balloon was so massive it had to be anchored to the floor. Now a days, hot air balloons are used as a source of enjoyment.
ReplyDeleteI’ve thought of going into a hot air balloon and traveling around the city. I saw posts about a couple having their first date on a hot air balloon on Snapchat and that made me think of what was talked about in lecture. I know it would be an amazing experience because of the view, but there are also things that scare me as well. From the reading, many people died because of the weather causing the balloons to crash. I thought this could happen to me as well since at times the weather can change at any instances. I’ve learned the uses of the hot air balloon has evolved by so much since it was first invented, as well as how it is still relevant now after so many years.
I totally agree, learning about why hot air balloons were invented was surprising. I have always dreamed about riding in one as well, especially after I saw the movie, Around the World in 80 Days. They might seem scary, but I think nowadays you can trust that you won't blow away. Also, I think the view will be worth it. The fact that air balloons have evolved from being used for battle to being used for leisure today, is definitely fascinating.
DeleteIn lecture, the professor talked about Panorama, which is a 360 degree unbroken view of an entire surrounding area. This reminded of the first time that I learned about the panoramic photo on my iPhone. I wanted to capture this photo of me with a lake and forest area in the background. I wasn't too sure that using the panorama feature was going to help, but I was shocked when I saw the results of it. In panoramic photos, it gives a whole new view, and a new perspective to the photo. When the professor talked about the room that had the panoramic painting spinning, and people would go see as a leisure activity, I was very intrigued. I was just imagining being there, and I wish I could experience it.
ReplyDeleteI absolutely love panoramas, they capture so much. Especially if its a big picture on the wall, its like you are watching a movie or reading a book, as you walk from one side to the other, there is a story that is being told.
DeleteWhen Professor Kaplan talked in lecture about how big of a deal the birds eye view was when it was first introduced it made me think how it's something that, today, we take for granted. I've seen a lot of views from above, like when I hike or take a plane. Even just using google maps for uber rides provides us with a birds eye view. I can't imagine how strange it must've been for people at first when they had never seen their city or their area from above. It's hard to picture a world where a map or a bird's eye view is a new concept. I can't imagine how incredible it must've been for the first people to go up in a hot air balloon, or how terrifying it must've been to be in a battle and see the other side show up with something you've never seen before floating in the sky. When Professor Kaplan showed in lecture the picture of the village that a failed hot air balloon landed in I can't even begin to imagine how much it would've caused alarm. Not only was it something new, but no one had ever seen anything other than animals flying in the sky. It really put perspective on how we take a lot of our modern-day technology for granted.
ReplyDeleteA really great example of this that isn't necessarily dealing with maps is the film "Arrival of a Train at La Ciotat" by The Lumière Brothers from 1895. Rumor has it that this short clip of literal train arriving at a station was first shown to an audience that jumped out of their seats and feld because they thought the train was going to burst through the screen and hit them. This is considered the first motion picture and was shown to an audience that had literally never experienced anything like it before as it was less an invention by the Lumiere brothers and more of an experiment. We especially take technology for granted because we grew up smack in the middle of the technological revolution in which advancements are expected on a yearly basis as tech companies out compete one another.
DeleteBoth in readings and in class, we've been asked to question what is considered a "map" and what is a landscape as we traditionally think of them as purely geographical or a work of art. Yet, as we've seen, maps and landscapes exist on more of a spectrum both in form, subject, content, and artistry. Recently, I was scrolling through Twitter and I came across this most that really took me aback and made me reconsider where I wanted to go with my map project. Whoever created the map had photographed their nude body in black and white and then used color paint to mark where other people had touched them. They included things such as touches from their parental unit, friends, lovers, and, most strikingly, a category marked by red paint: "somebody I told no". That hit hard and, though the other categories urge the viewer to recall similar often meaningful moments, this one specifically demands attention in its color, the placement of the paint, and the subject, being sexual assault and rape. I was struggling with the idea of a map dealing with a social issue and kept reverting to a situation from last quarter in my Native American studies class in which the professor asked anyone with digital imaging skills to render a more informative map of the Standing Rock site and the proposed path of the Dakota access pipeline that could be sent to news outlets. These photos I came across really made the idea that maps are more than what we think of traditionally and that, additionally, maps and landscapes exist on a spectrum as this project was both a map and a landscape of a human body.
ReplyDeleteD.W. Meinig's piece about the ten ways landscape may be interpreted caught my attention the most. As a film major, when viewing a film, the first frame a viewer sees is an establishing shot. This shot is for the most part is a view of the scenery/landscape of nature or a city. The landscape sets the setting until the camera either zooms in close to a certain spot or the scene switches to a new one completely. I'm mentioning this part of film because as I was reading "Ten Versions of the Same Scene", I was struck with the idea that the way one sees landscape could definitely change the initial feelings towards the film the viewer is watching. For example, the 2015 film Cinderella the establishing shot is of a meadow before a house where the main character's parents are enjoying their day. The scenery is lit up brightly with wild flowers everywhere and a small house in the background. In another establishing shot in the same film, the audiences sees the landscape from up above and once again the house is there, but this time it is engulfed by it and the lighting is darker. From Meinig's ten versions you could take nature, artifact, and place. The landscape as nature version plays well because in these two establishing shots there is an emphasis on what is surrounding the house and not the house itself. Sure the house stands out as out-of-place, but the vibrancy comes from the scenery itself. Landscape as artifact comes in because of the house that stands out in the scenery of the shot, "the mark of man... nature [providing] a stage." Through this version, nature is diminished somewhat and now the house is what is the center of attention. For landscape as place, the establishing shot does this by makes the home look safe among the forest it is place in. The article says, "it is a view which suggests... a well-cultivated sense of place is an important dimension of human well-being." In other words, there is a sense of security within the shot--- the way the forest seems to hug the house, almost in a protective manner. In conclusion, the way we see landscape and the way we choose to interpret it, could vastly change the way one feels about shots in film as is the case with the scene in Cinderella (2015).
ReplyDelete*I am re-posting this because i did not post it on the correct page of the blog the first time*
ReplyDeleteBlog Assignment #1
Ryan Blanc
This post refers to the map that was handed out in the first day of the Monday discussion session
This map shows the Dakota Pipeline, a controversial ongoing project. It seems like the Trump administration wants to push the project forward, claiming it will create American jobs. This map shows information about the history of Sioux native Americans. It addresses a problem, it shows the environmental impact a pipeline would have if it was built as well as conflicts between local police and native Americans. This map is great for informing people about the Dakota Access pipeline Controversy.
This map shows “moments of injustice” and “injustice via water manipulation”. This map does not show topographical information, information about the weather, flora, fauna, and other important details to get a full picture. This Maps excludes a lot of the good things it would bring, such as a couple of jobs for Americans, how much it would help American companies. For the record I don’t think we should build it, but this map only include information showing negative effects from the pipeline.
Obviously for a 2-dimensional map you are limited to how much information can be presented. This map focuses on arguing the negative impacts a pipeline could bring and highlights existing injustice towards native Americans. The title of the map is The Dakota Pipeline in Context, the title of the map tells a lot about what the map maker Is trying to convey. This is the context the person who made this map wants us to see it in. If the Oil Company’s made a map with the same title, it would probably show profit margins and job creation, and completely leave out social injustice.
I am going a bit back in time where I went to Rome during my study abroad in Florence, Italy. I absolutely loved Rome when I went there, and wished I had more time to spent there even though I was there I think 2 or 3 days. Still, that is not enough. Anyways, I saw so many amazing landmarks, and found them on my own (walking). One on the landmarks did give me a hard time though, I just could not find it and that was Trevi Fountain. I tried to so hard not to get my phone out looking for it, but the paper map just did not help. So here I am, thankfully there were a lot of tourists around so I felt safe, but I was stubborn to ask for help in finding the fountain. So here I am pretending to text on my phone but at the same time trying to find that fountain. The streets were so crowded and narrow, and the signs were so hard to see, and some signs I could not find at all. How this story ends is that I finally found the fountain, and it had a plastic wall around it, for construction, but there was still a place to throw the coin in. I did, and I am hoping to go back, find it, and hopefully the construction on the fountain would not be happening.
ReplyDelete