Justice and Revenge

In many past societies, justice and revenge were considered very similar. As said by Miller, justice was fair if revenge was taken out on the criminal even if it was behind the law’s eye. Today, revenge and justice each have their part in our society. If a citizen of the United States was asked to define revenge, he or she would probably have a very barbaric idea or think of gangs in inner cities. Vengeance and revenge also have a very emotional tie because it is said to be blind and has no end. With all of these negative connotations coming to mind when defining revenge, it is possible to see why revenge is associated with fear. Justice however, is a more rational way of dealing with punishment. Although justice seems to be elusive to many victims, it is a less emotional and depending on the victim, more satisfying endeavor than vengeance. Governments use a system of justice instead of revenge by taking the punishment away from the usually emotional victim and into the hands of lawyers and judges. By using a system of set practices and punishments, emotion does not blur the facts of the case and the minds of the jurors.

A Defense of the Retributivist View

I agreed with Michael Moore's theroy of Retributivism because it is based on a moral conscience. Retributivism is described by punishment only because the offender deserves to be punished for their crime. It is also justified because the law or the people in charge of the law have a certain moral standard. It is also believed in this school of thought that society not only should but has a duty to punish offenders using institutions that guide the citizens. Micheal Moore also believes that humans have a built in conscience that tells them that criminals need to be punished. He thinks that there are very few people that will "turn the other cheek" while they are being wronged or have been wronged. I generally agree with these opinions because if humans did not have a basic human need for justice then it would not have originated in the first place. Although i think that most people have a general sense of compassion, people can only forgive for so long. Retributivism is dangerous for individuals to carry out but with civilized governments and justice systems it is certainly possible.

Compairing Modern and Post Modern Architecture

Although most people have a general understanding of architecture and types of styles, many do not know specific movements. In my opinion, Modern and Post Modern movements are very important and interesting because they contrast so heavily even though post modern was right after the modern style. Although people have probably seen both types of architecture, many do not know how to catorize them even with their stark differences. Modernism was based on a simple, elegant design that did not disrupt the environment while post modernism used bright materials and interesting shapes to draw attention to itself. Since the styles were so radical for their time periods, it is nessisary to break them down into what created them and how they grew to global proportions. This museum more importantly will reflect how society changed during those years and the ties that art and architecture share. It also has the potential to inspire young architects to create a new style from two old types of design.

MoMA Critique

I visited the Museum of Modern Art in New York City over spring break and found the building quite modern which portrayed what was inside the musuem accuately. The exhibit that i wanted to see most was the Architecture and Design portion where works from Sullivan, Frank Lloyd Wright, Rem Koolhaas and other famous architects were located. Not only did this exhibit show architecture, but it shows various types of design from chairs to cars to forks. The mechanical objects were interesting to see in a museum such as this because many people do not see these as typical design features. A very unique artifact was the helicopter that hung from the ceiling because viewers could see it from the first floor. The Museum also broke down types of design into time periods which created a more systimatic path for viewers. Another positive aspect were the television screens that showed the development of a site to serve a better purpose. This involved the viewers into the exhibit with audio and visual aspects.
There were only a few negative aspects of MoMA. The major aspect was that the design artifacts were not catorigized into types of design. This created an overwhelming expirence of seeing a lot of different items such as cars and forks relatively close to each other. There also could have been more interactive exhibits which showed how design helps the community. Although it had some weaknesses, the musuem did an accurate job depicting how design influences so many different areas of culture.

Culver City Farmer's Market

For my public place, I chose the Culver City Farmer’s Market. In my experience, I found that this space was extremely public because of the variety of people that flocked to this market place. From ancient times to about thirty years ago, market places were extremely public places where all types of people would converge to buy necessary items, mostly food. Recently, however, malls and up scale food markets have been catering only to the rich, creating limited diversity. The Farmer’s Market, on the other hand, had stalls and attractions for almost every social and racial group locating in Los Angeles. There were food stalls from Japan, Germany, Mexico, and Italy for different races while lavender and expensive cheese stalls catered more to the upper class. I saw families with children, couples, and friends in the farmer’s market. Some people went strictly for food shopping while others were wandering around tasting different food and being social. The circulation around the market was very straightforward but the movement around each stall was different creating a unique feel. Overall, the farmer’s market was a highly personal and social experience, one that made me feel more connected to a city that many call detached.

Why be different?

The conflict between public and private space is most prevalent in Los Angeles. Since Los Angeles is a very car and highway based city, public space is often over looked while citizens drive in their own private cars to their own sepratated houses. People believe that it is safer to be in excusive space and are afraid of change. Most people barely interact with each other which creates a highly stratified society even though the city is very diverse. It is hard to find a public place in LA that combines all different circles of society. The beaches are closest thing LA has to a central public place but even they are separated with different sterotypes. Some beaches are considered only for the rich and others are considered to be more working class. LA needs a more public places because some citizens are losing touch with the heart of the city. They are also losing the compasion and pride in the city that they once had. Since LA is also very spread out, people are not exploring other areas of the city. If there was an interesting or exciting public place, I believe that people would travel to places they have never been to expirence something new.

College is still important

My opinion about college changed slightly after information was presented on the topic. The stats that were presented were very interesting because they were opposing my original ideas about finding a job after college. After writing this paper i found that people do not have to have a college education to succed. Having a degree makes life much easier but people are able to teach themselves skills which they can use to find jobs. Some of the readings were quite depressing because the percentage of successful college graduates did not seem very high, constrating the popular belief. Although this information is important to be aware of, it did not change my ideas about the importance of college.