Salvator and Claude

Salvator Rosa (1615-1673) was an Italian Baroque painter, poet, and actor. He spent most of his career in Florence, Italy. After studying under Anielle Falcone, another artist, many believe he spent time travelling with bandits. If this were true, it would explain some of the inspiration for his seemingly dark pieces often depicting bandits or hermits, but also angels as shown below.



Claude Lorraine (1600-1682), more commonly known as Claude, was a French Baroque painter. Claude's work was often landscape paintings, similar to those of Rosa, but his were often done using much lighter colors.




Both of these artists lived during the Baroque era, which was slightly before the classical era. The Baroque era focused on absolutism during a time of Catholic Revival. Much of the work done in this period focused on light and shadows. The work of Rosa quite clearly focuses more on the intense shadows as opposed to the light. The work of Claude on the other hand, focuses more on the intense light.

In Arcadia, both of these painters are referenced by Hannah as she states:

"English landscape was invented by gardeners imitating foreign painters who were evoking classical authors. The whole thing was brought home in the luggage from the grand tour. Here, look--Capability Brown doing Claude, who was doing Virgil. Arcadia! And here, superimposed by Richard Noakes, untamed nature in the style of Salvator Rosa. It's the Gothic novel expressed in landscape. Everything but vampires"

Hannah explains how the English Landscape was practically created by these painters. Capability Brown was imitating Claude, who was imitating Virgil (70-9 BC).  She also believes that Noakes was imitating the work of Salvator Rosa which explains why Noakes piece was so dark.

What Your Parent's Didn't Tell You About Vegetables

Throughout my reading of Jon Krakauer's Into the Wild, I became increasingly interested in the young man in the story, Chris McCandless. I would like to be able to say that when I look at him, I see myself. But I can't. Over the past few years, my mental toughness has skyrocketed, but if I were to put myself in a position similar to that of McCandless, I wouldn't last a week. Many people believe that he is just an arrogant, stupid, crazy boy, but I would disagree. The way I see it, his beliefs are very similar to those of many people throughout the world. He just wanted to live in a world where education, relationships, and money were irrelevant. At times, we all want this. Chris McCandless just happened to be one of the few people tough enough to attempt to achieve this. His experience is compelling to a reader like myself. Sooner than I can imagine, I will be going off to college, building new relationships, and having to make my own money. This terrifies me. With that being said, I don't see myself throwing that all away and attempting to live off the land anytime soon.

Not only was I interested in McCandless, but Krakauer as well. Why was he so interested in this particular death? In his story, he does give an account of one of his adventures and he relates his story to McCandless's, but there had to be something more to write an entire book about this young man who starved until death. Did the starvation cause his death? Nobody will ever know for sure, but we do know that he did starve until his death.

Twenty years later, Krakauer is still finding new information about this story. It's hard to know exactly why he was so interested in this story, but I feel that the more time that passes, the more invested Krakauer gets in the story. In his most recent article in the New Yorker, Krakauer's opinion on the cause of death has changed. Originally, he believed that the true cause of the death was due to a mold that had been growing on the seeds. Now, after his continued search, he believes that the true culprit is ODAP. No matter the cause, Krakuer invested every bit of himself in the story. I do not believe he wrote the book, just to write something that people would read. Jon Krakauer cared. He wants to find a way to put this all to rest. He wants answers to questions where answers are unattainable.

Krakauer is among the group of people that still believes humans can take a step away from technology and live in a world focused more on the beauties of nature. What many people don't realize is that Chris's story matters. The story of his life proves that we are moving towards a time where we will be cut off from nature. The human "circle" will not interfere with the nature "circle." Fewer and fewer kids learn basic survival skills growing up and in a life threatening situation, the difference between life and death could simply be vegetables. While most kids may never be put in a life threatening situation in the middle of Alaska, this does not mean we have no need to understand the part of the world that has allowed us to live for thousands and thousands of years. Surprisingly, humans did not need cell phones, computers, and motor vehicles to survive. Humans did live off the land, but we can't anymore. Not because it isn't possible, but because the way we live and were raised doesn't allow it to be possible.

What is Freedom?

In this series of videos, I focused on something that I find myself thinking about any day: freedom. My first video focuses on the weight room. I spend a lot of time here on a weekly basis, but not for the same reasons many people do. Of course, I like the idea of being more physically attractive, but in relation to the mental toughness that this daily routine forces me to express, I couldn't care less about how I appear. The practice of mental toughness is very clear in Into the Wild with many Chris McCandless showing clear signs of mental toughness, even if he is not mentally stable. Even though I feel free in the weight room, I can't help but notice the clock that times everything I do. Everybody lives by the clock. It tells us when to sleep, when to eat, and in this case, when to start the next round of power cleans. My second video focuses on a more natural piece as I sit in a tree. That's nature, right? Ironically, I broke my phone as I climbed the tree. It fell out of my pocket and the 20 foot fall did not treat it very well. Maybe a little less ironically, the tree was located in my backyard, but this seems to be as close as I can get to nature without spending more than 30 minutes in a car, and because of this, I am not out of earshot of my family who always seems to be limiting my freedom with constant orders and chores. My third piece focuses on the driving aspect. When I get in my car, nobody can stop me, except for the people who decided that our roads need stop lights and stop signs. This freedom that I have is the opposite of my ideas of freedom from my younger days. I was always free when I went outside to run around, but after growing up, I have come to the realization that things change. My few freedoms involve technology and very little of this so called "nature."