La Tour Eiffel
Today is the first day of our amazing tour of Paris. I still cannot believe that I am here. The city is brimming with history and culture. I am drawn to spending as much time as I can at the museums, trying to soak in all the information that I recall studying about in history classes; it comes to life here.
La Tour Eiffel is our starting point. It is the icon of Paris, and yet it is probably the one place I least wanted to visit. (I am sure that I am one of the few who have that viewpoint.) However, it
is an amazing piece of architecture. The gracefulness of its four supporting legs and the intricate
latticework of the iron are what make it beautiful. I must say that when I first viewed it, I was amazed at how captivating it was.
I find the background history of the tower to be quite interesting, and
perhaps that is what makes the tour mean so much more to me.
I recall from my history classes that the tower was built for the 1889
World’s Fair (Exposition Universelle) by the then gifted designer, Gustave Eiffel. However, I do not recall that part of the reason for its erection was to represent the triumph of the French Revolution over the previous power of the monarchies. With that knowledge, I can understand why the design of it is so significant. It is as though the arms of many uniting towards the heavens, a symbol of conquest for freedom. To think that the tower was to be torn down twenty years after its erection seems rather wasteful of the endeavors of those who toiled to construct it. All of the other iron structures assembled for the Exposition were torn down; the Eiffel Tower is the only one which remained. Perhaps this too is significant, since it is a celebration of liberty from the French Monarchy and a representation of France’s industrial progress
to the world.
Once I was up on the viewing decks, I realized why Mme Lalonde had us
begin our Parisian tour here. The layout of Paris is understandable now. It is easy to see the divisions of the arrondissementsfrom LaTour Eiffel. At ground level, I did not understand why the streets appeared straight for only a short way; there are so many zigzags. But in looking down at the city from the tower, I see now that this is what divides the city into the different barrios. I wonder if this too was not an intension of the city designer, Georges-Eugene Haussmann. The wide boulevards do make it easy for the army to keep the masses of people under control, but it also makes it more difficult for invading armies to move quickly and easily to the palaces.
Ah, the history of Paris!
It is right here, laid out before me! Amazing!
Tomorrow it is on to Notre Dame.
I can hardly wait! Au revoir!
La Tour Eiffel is our starting point. It is the icon of Paris, and yet it is probably the one place I least wanted to visit. (I am sure that I am one of the few who have that viewpoint.) However, it
is an amazing piece of architecture. The gracefulness of its four supporting legs and the intricate
latticework of the iron are what make it beautiful. I must say that when I first viewed it, I was amazed at how captivating it was.
I find the background history of the tower to be quite interesting, and
perhaps that is what makes the tour mean so much more to me.
I recall from my history classes that the tower was built for the 1889
World’s Fair (Exposition Universelle) by the then gifted designer, Gustave Eiffel. However, I do not recall that part of the reason for its erection was to represent the triumph of the French Revolution over the previous power of the monarchies. With that knowledge, I can understand why the design of it is so significant. It is as though the arms of many uniting towards the heavens, a symbol of conquest for freedom. To think that the tower was to be torn down twenty years after its erection seems rather wasteful of the endeavors of those who toiled to construct it. All of the other iron structures assembled for the Exposition were torn down; the Eiffel Tower is the only one which remained. Perhaps this too is significant, since it is a celebration of liberty from the French Monarchy and a representation of France’s industrial progress
to the world.
Once I was up on the viewing decks, I realized why Mme Lalonde had us
begin our Parisian tour here. The layout of Paris is understandable now. It is easy to see the divisions of the arrondissementsfrom LaTour Eiffel. At ground level, I did not understand why the streets appeared straight for only a short way; there are so many zigzags. But in looking down at the city from the tower, I see now that this is what divides the city into the different barrios. I wonder if this too was not an intension of the city designer, Georges-Eugene Haussmann. The wide boulevards do make it easy for the army to keep the masses of people under control, but it also makes it more difficult for invading armies to move quickly and easily to the palaces.
Ah, the history of Paris!
It is right here, laid out before me! Amazing!
Tomorrow it is on to Notre Dame.
I can hardly wait! Au revoir!
Cathédrale Notre-Dame de Paris
Today I had to keep pinching myself to make sure I wasn’t dreaming! Today we truly indulged in a spiritual experience, a visit to the Notre Dame. Yesterday’s trip to la tour Eiffel was a four on a scale of one to ten. Today’s trip to Notre Dame was a fifteen!!!
I could write page after page of this inspirational experience. The beautiful
stained glass windows, the vaulted ceilings, the way the light radiates within the cathedral seemingly to pull you upwards towards heaven, the sudden reverence which overtakes everyone as they enter, the way you feel that gasp escape your lips, and oh my Lord----the organ! Yes, I know there is more than one, but THE organ, the GREAT organ, with its pipes---7,800 pipes! I cringed when I heard the passersby say, “How sad that the pipes
obstruct the West Rose Window.” Instead, I say “How the light from the West Rose Window enhances the beauty of the pipes---such an elegant backdrop for them!” And the music! Oh! It brought me to tears! It was more beautiful than I had ever imagined. How lucky the angels are to be serenaded by music so grand. I would never tire of it!!!
So, what exactly is the magic of this place which stirs the emotions which lie so deep within you? Is it just the Gothic architecture, pulling you heavenward? Perhaps that is the foundation of it. The Roman architecture seems like a heavy hand, dark and foreboding, holding the people down, controlling. Even the flying buttresses of Saint Germain des Prés left me feeling repressed. Whereas when one is approaching Notre Dame, the flying buttresses appear lighter, more grand, more spiritual. So before you even enter through the enormous doors your soul has begun to take flight.
Somehow, the sweeping beauty of the Gothic style merges with the overpowering religious presence engulfing your senses---an aesthetic
overload! It’s as though your soul is being drawn to a higher level---a level where you can commune with God. It’s as though you are having an out of body experience. Is that the illusion the Gothic designers intended? Or have you actually broken the bonds of your earthly body to experience a taste of the encompassing love and salvation of God in the snapshot of a second?
As I left through the Left West Portal, and was bathed once again by the Parisian sunshine, I sensed a longing inside of me to stay. It’s as though an addiction to God’s sanctifying grace beckoned me to return to the holy sanctity within. As I turned to walk towards the street, my eye caught the gargoyle perched aloft the flying buttress above me. His hideous smile made me shudder. He seemed to be laughing at me, at my thoughts that I had somehow felt the very presence of God. A delusion of my mind? Perhaps I was no different than the souls which had passed through those wooden doors in centuries past, under his watchful eyes.
Today I had to keep pinching myself to make sure I wasn’t dreaming! Today we truly indulged in a spiritual experience, a visit to the Notre Dame. Yesterday’s trip to la tour Eiffel was a four on a scale of one to ten. Today’s trip to Notre Dame was a fifteen!!!
I could write page after page of this inspirational experience. The beautiful
stained glass windows, the vaulted ceilings, the way the light radiates within the cathedral seemingly to pull you upwards towards heaven, the sudden reverence which overtakes everyone as they enter, the way you feel that gasp escape your lips, and oh my Lord----the organ! Yes, I know there is more than one, but THE organ, the GREAT organ, with its pipes---7,800 pipes! I cringed when I heard the passersby say, “How sad that the pipes
obstruct the West Rose Window.” Instead, I say “How the light from the West Rose Window enhances the beauty of the pipes---such an elegant backdrop for them!” And the music! Oh! It brought me to tears! It was more beautiful than I had ever imagined. How lucky the angels are to be serenaded by music so grand. I would never tire of it!!!
So, what exactly is the magic of this place which stirs the emotions which lie so deep within you? Is it just the Gothic architecture, pulling you heavenward? Perhaps that is the foundation of it. The Roman architecture seems like a heavy hand, dark and foreboding, holding the people down, controlling. Even the flying buttresses of Saint Germain des Prés left me feeling repressed. Whereas when one is approaching Notre Dame, the flying buttresses appear lighter, more grand, more spiritual. So before you even enter through the enormous doors your soul has begun to take flight.
Somehow, the sweeping beauty of the Gothic style merges with the overpowering religious presence engulfing your senses---an aesthetic
overload! It’s as though your soul is being drawn to a higher level---a level where you can commune with God. It’s as though you are having an out of body experience. Is that the illusion the Gothic designers intended? Or have you actually broken the bonds of your earthly body to experience a taste of the encompassing love and salvation of God in the snapshot of a second?
As I left through the Left West Portal, and was bathed once again by the Parisian sunshine, I sensed a longing inside of me to stay. It’s as though an addiction to God’s sanctifying grace beckoned me to return to the holy sanctity within. As I turned to walk towards the street, my eye caught the gargoyle perched aloft the flying buttress above me. His hideous smile made me shudder. He seemed to be laughing at me, at my thoughts that I had somehow felt the very presence of God. A delusion of my mind? Perhaps I was no different than the souls which had passed through those wooden doors in centuries past, under his watchful eyes.
Musée de Cluny
Yesterday, when we visited Cathédrale Notre-Dame de Paris and Saint Germain des Prés,
the architecture was distinctly different at each one. But today, the Roman and Gothic architectures merged at this one location. The Abbey looked on the outside just the way I had pictured an abbey to appear. I appreciated the inner courtyard, which would have protected the monks
as they strolled to the well to fetch water. There are 4 gardens at the abbey, each distinctly different and each located in a different area of the grounds. There is the vegetable
garden, herb garden, the garden of love, and the garden dedicated to the Virgin Mary.
Another interesting area to visit outside is the Roman baths. Obviously, this is one of the older sections. They were built about 52 BC. Besides the baths, the Roman engineering made this a top quality establishment with sewers, aqueducts, amphitheaters, temples, and a protective city wall. To strengthen these luxury items made with stone, the Roman engineers used cement, which they are accredited as having discovered. One of the temples, the Temple of Jupiter, was built on the site which later would become Notre Dame.
Inside the Musée de Cluny, you see the mixture of Roman and Gothic influence in the structure of the arches. Some distinctly
rounded and Roman, and others beginning to curve upwards. The ceilings are exquisite, high and vaulted, ornately decorated with a
lattice of ribs. I found myself having to stop to gaze in awe so that I would not bump into the many children who were on some sort of field trip with the teacher. (Wisely, she had them sit down on the floor so they could gaze up in awe without running into anyone.)
My favorite spectacle at the museum was the tapestries. They were more fabulous than I had expected, so large and full of
life. Each one telling a story; it was almost as though we were eavesdropping on the figures’ daily activities. The 6 panels of the “Woman and the Unicorn” were obviously the highlight for all of the museum visitors. These Flemmish panels dated from 1484 – 1500. The story they unfolded before us is but an educated guess. It is believed that one of the 5 senses is depicted on each of the first five panels: taste, hearing, sight, smell, and touch. The last panel is known as À Mon Seul Désir - my own will alone. I, and countless others, stood studying the beauty of the tapestries. I wondered if the lion depicted power and the unicorn represented an inner desire, a passion. Was the young woman struggling between the opportunity to claim strength and power or to find solace in the desires of passion? She never reached out to
the lion, but instead seemed drawn to the unicorn’s gentleness. The interpretation of the last panel: “love desires only beauty of the
soul”, “to calm passion”. Alas, we will never know the true secret of her story.
My curiosity got the best of me today. I decided to venture off on a side trip, apart from the rest of the group. I just had to take the long 4 and a half hour bus trip to see Lascaux. I simply could not bear the thought of having traveled all the way to Paris and not make a point to see the famous cave paintings there at Lascaux. These are the oldest cave paintings to have ever been discovered; they are 17,000 years old. Older than the pyramids of Egypt! Visitors are not allowed into the caves anymore. The caves were discovered by 2 boys (and their dog) in the 1940s. Much to the horrors of the anthropological and archaeological world, the paintings began to disintegrate in the 15 years the public was allowed to view them ---all those thousands of years preserved and then once the climate changed, they began to quickly disappear. So, a replicated cave has been constructed allowing the tourists a chance to see a rendition of the famous prehistoric paintings. To see the more than 2,000 animals (bulls, horses, cattle, stags, and even a rhinoceros) was worth the trip. I didn’t get back to the dorm until very late tonight, but that’s alright. I will never get another chance like this!
Yesterday, when we visited Cathédrale Notre-Dame de Paris and Saint Germain des Prés,
the architecture was distinctly different at each one. But today, the Roman and Gothic architectures merged at this one location. The Abbey looked on the outside just the way I had pictured an abbey to appear. I appreciated the inner courtyard, which would have protected the monks
as they strolled to the well to fetch water. There are 4 gardens at the abbey, each distinctly different and each located in a different area of the grounds. There is the vegetable
garden, herb garden, the garden of love, and the garden dedicated to the Virgin Mary.
Another interesting area to visit outside is the Roman baths. Obviously, this is one of the older sections. They were built about 52 BC. Besides the baths, the Roman engineering made this a top quality establishment with sewers, aqueducts, amphitheaters, temples, and a protective city wall. To strengthen these luxury items made with stone, the Roman engineers used cement, which they are accredited as having discovered. One of the temples, the Temple of Jupiter, was built on the site which later would become Notre Dame.
Inside the Musée de Cluny, you see the mixture of Roman and Gothic influence in the structure of the arches. Some distinctly
rounded and Roman, and others beginning to curve upwards. The ceilings are exquisite, high and vaulted, ornately decorated with a
lattice of ribs. I found myself having to stop to gaze in awe so that I would not bump into the many children who were on some sort of field trip with the teacher. (Wisely, she had them sit down on the floor so they could gaze up in awe without running into anyone.)
My favorite spectacle at the museum was the tapestries. They were more fabulous than I had expected, so large and full of
life. Each one telling a story; it was almost as though we were eavesdropping on the figures’ daily activities. The 6 panels of the “Woman and the Unicorn” were obviously the highlight for all of the museum visitors. These Flemmish panels dated from 1484 – 1500. The story they unfolded before us is but an educated guess. It is believed that one of the 5 senses is depicted on each of the first five panels: taste, hearing, sight, smell, and touch. The last panel is known as À Mon Seul Désir - my own will alone. I, and countless others, stood studying the beauty of the tapestries. I wondered if the lion depicted power and the unicorn represented an inner desire, a passion. Was the young woman struggling between the opportunity to claim strength and power or to find solace in the desires of passion? She never reached out to
the lion, but instead seemed drawn to the unicorn’s gentleness. The interpretation of the last panel: “love desires only beauty of the
soul”, “to calm passion”. Alas, we will never know the true secret of her story.
My curiosity got the best of me today. I decided to venture off on a side trip, apart from the rest of the group. I just had to take the long 4 and a half hour bus trip to see Lascaux. I simply could not bear the thought of having traveled all the way to Paris and not make a point to see the famous cave paintings there at Lascaux. These are the oldest cave paintings to have ever been discovered; they are 17,000 years old. Older than the pyramids of Egypt! Visitors are not allowed into the caves anymore. The caves were discovered by 2 boys (and their dog) in the 1940s. Much to the horrors of the anthropological and archaeological world, the paintings began to disintegrate in the 15 years the public was allowed to view them ---all those thousands of years preserved and then once the climate changed, they began to quickly disappear. So, a replicated cave has been constructed allowing the tourists a chance to see a rendition of the famous prehistoric paintings. To see the more than 2,000 animals (bulls, horses, cattle, stags, and even a rhinoceros) was worth the trip. I didn’t get back to the dorm until very late tonight, but that’s alright. I will never get another chance like this!
The Louvre
Today was exhausting! My head is still spinning from all that we saw today. The Louvre is ENORMOUS! I am so glad that Mme LaLonde has broken the tour up into two days, rather than our trying to see it all in one day. Actually, I believe you could spend a week there and still not see everything. It is difficult to fathom everything that we covered today. I’m still in wonder of it all!
It seems odd to enter the museum (which houses treasures from 3100 BC) through a glass pyramid, designed by the modern American architect, Pei. Once inside, I was glad I
purchased the tour book, for this helped me to understand exactly what I was seeing. All of the signs are only in French. There are so many halls and rooms, each filled with irreplaceable treasures, artifacts, paintings, sculptures, and antiquities.
We began our tour off the branches of the Sully; visiting both the Denon (on the South) and the Richelieu (on the North). Our focus, for those not familiar with the Louvre, was on the paintings of Western Civilization. Of course, the star was Mona Lisa. Even though I tend to
not want to see what the regular “tourist” is interested in, I must admit that I was excited to gaze upon her, and was captivated by her smile.
She’s every bit as mystifying as the literature describes. Obviously, she is hugely popular, to the point of the museum’s installation of extra measures of security. She is visible through a shadow box with bullet-proof glass, the only painting I saw under such “lock and key”.
It is amazing how Mona Lisa seems to make you a part of the painting, an active participant. It is as though there is a silent communication between you and this simple, yet mesmerizing woman. It is said that Leonardo da Vinci was commissioned to paint a portrait of
Lisa del Giocondo, the wife of a friend of his, Francesco del Giocondo. The Mona Lisa is supposed to be what he (da Vinci) felt was the ideal portrait of a woman. It is said that her smile represents the link between the connection of humanity and nature.
Not far from the Mona Lisa is da Vinci’s The Virgin and Child with St. Anne. I wondered if da Vinci was again trying to illustrate the connection of humanity and nature because of the landscaping in the background. It is not the focal point at all, and the viewer really is not aware of this when studying the painting, just as in Mona Lisa. Your eyes are drawn to the bonding displayed between the Virgin Mary, the toddler Jesus, and Anne, the mother of Mary. What makes this painting different from the Mona Lisa is that you are not part of the scene, nor of the time. You are the spectator, as though viewing the episode through a window in time.
We also visited the Spanish Painting wing off the Denon. One painting which caught my attention was Jusepe de Ribera’s “The Clubfooted Boy”. It is interesting, for many of the artists did not include people with disabilities. In those that did, the disabled person’s expression leaves the viewer with a sense of sympathy for the individual. This is not so with the lad in this painting. The artist does not try to hide the imperfection; rather it is a drawing point of the picture. The note in the boy’s hand translates to “Give me alms, for the love of God.”
His proud stance establishes his rightful place in humanity, for we are all equal before God. De Ribera is known for painting the horrors and realities of human cruelty. He valued truth over idealism.
Another Spanish artist whose paintings we viewed was Francisco de Goya. Although he was commissioned to paint for the courts, he did not hide his feelings for the goings-on of the noble and wealthy. Many of his paintings include a hint of the corruption which was a part of the lives of the subjects in the scenes. I believe my favorite painting of his was Charles IV of Spain and His Family. He placed Louisa, Charles’wife, in the center of the portrait. It is thought he did this to illustrate that actually she was the one with the power. De Goya painted himself in the background, a spectator of the family, practically unnoticed.
Besides the paintings, we ventured on to see the antiquities of the Near East, Egypt, Greece, Roman, and the Islamic Art Collection.
All were fabulous! Something I learned about Islamic art, which I had never taken note of before, is that they do not use human forms in their artwork. Instead, they use repeating patterns, very often comprised of geometrical floral or vegetal designs. This is called arabesque. The reason for the absence of humans is because in the Islamic law (known as Sharia law), the human form represents idolatry, and therefore, is a sin against God. The use of the arabesque design symbolizes the “transcendent, indivisible, and infinite nature of God”. The designer of the artifact intentionally will have made a mistake in the pattern, for this shows humility to God, for only God can produce perfection. How
fascinating! This had never occurred to me before!
Goodness! I could go on and on. However, I had better save the rest for another time. My brain feels fried from all of the connections I have made today with these exquisite pieces of art. It is so much to ponder in just one day!
Today was exhausting! My head is still spinning from all that we saw today. The Louvre is ENORMOUS! I am so glad that Mme LaLonde has broken the tour up into two days, rather than our trying to see it all in one day. Actually, I believe you could spend a week there and still not see everything. It is difficult to fathom everything that we covered today. I’m still in wonder of it all!
It seems odd to enter the museum (which houses treasures from 3100 BC) through a glass pyramid, designed by the modern American architect, Pei. Once inside, I was glad I
purchased the tour book, for this helped me to understand exactly what I was seeing. All of the signs are only in French. There are so many halls and rooms, each filled with irreplaceable treasures, artifacts, paintings, sculptures, and antiquities.
We began our tour off the branches of the Sully; visiting both the Denon (on the South) and the Richelieu (on the North). Our focus, for those not familiar with the Louvre, was on the paintings of Western Civilization. Of course, the star was Mona Lisa. Even though I tend to
not want to see what the regular “tourist” is interested in, I must admit that I was excited to gaze upon her, and was captivated by her smile.
She’s every bit as mystifying as the literature describes. Obviously, she is hugely popular, to the point of the museum’s installation of extra measures of security. She is visible through a shadow box with bullet-proof glass, the only painting I saw under such “lock and key”.
It is amazing how Mona Lisa seems to make you a part of the painting, an active participant. It is as though there is a silent communication between you and this simple, yet mesmerizing woman. It is said that Leonardo da Vinci was commissioned to paint a portrait of
Lisa del Giocondo, the wife of a friend of his, Francesco del Giocondo. The Mona Lisa is supposed to be what he (da Vinci) felt was the ideal portrait of a woman. It is said that her smile represents the link between the connection of humanity and nature.
Not far from the Mona Lisa is da Vinci’s The Virgin and Child with St. Anne. I wondered if da Vinci was again trying to illustrate the connection of humanity and nature because of the landscaping in the background. It is not the focal point at all, and the viewer really is not aware of this when studying the painting, just as in Mona Lisa. Your eyes are drawn to the bonding displayed between the Virgin Mary, the toddler Jesus, and Anne, the mother of Mary. What makes this painting different from the Mona Lisa is that you are not part of the scene, nor of the time. You are the spectator, as though viewing the episode through a window in time.
We also visited the Spanish Painting wing off the Denon. One painting which caught my attention was Jusepe de Ribera’s “The Clubfooted Boy”. It is interesting, for many of the artists did not include people with disabilities. In those that did, the disabled person’s expression leaves the viewer with a sense of sympathy for the individual. This is not so with the lad in this painting. The artist does not try to hide the imperfection; rather it is a drawing point of the picture. The note in the boy’s hand translates to “Give me alms, for the love of God.”
His proud stance establishes his rightful place in humanity, for we are all equal before God. De Ribera is known for painting the horrors and realities of human cruelty. He valued truth over idealism.
Another Spanish artist whose paintings we viewed was Francisco de Goya. Although he was commissioned to paint for the courts, he did not hide his feelings for the goings-on of the noble and wealthy. Many of his paintings include a hint of the corruption which was a part of the lives of the subjects in the scenes. I believe my favorite painting of his was Charles IV of Spain and His Family. He placed Louisa, Charles’wife, in the center of the portrait. It is thought he did this to illustrate that actually she was the one with the power. De Goya painted himself in the background, a spectator of the family, practically unnoticed.
Besides the paintings, we ventured on to see the antiquities of the Near East, Egypt, Greece, Roman, and the Islamic Art Collection.
All were fabulous! Something I learned about Islamic art, which I had never taken note of before, is that they do not use human forms in their artwork. Instead, they use repeating patterns, very often comprised of geometrical floral or vegetal designs. This is called arabesque. The reason for the absence of humans is because in the Islamic law (known as Sharia law), the human form represents idolatry, and therefore, is a sin against God. The use of the arabesque design symbolizes the “transcendent, indivisible, and infinite nature of God”. The designer of the artifact intentionally will have made a mistake in the pattern, for this shows humility to God, for only God can produce perfection. How
fascinating! This had never occurred to me before!
Goodness! I could go on and on. However, I had better save the rest for another time. My brain feels fried from all of the connections I have made today with these exquisite pieces of art. It is so much to ponder in just one day!
Versailles
Our trip today was monumental. We visited the Palace of Versailles, the
Palace of King Louis XIV. The construction of this palace is prodigious, far more exquisite than what one imagines in a castle. The palace is a showcase to the world, displaying glamour, glitz, and royal prestige beyond compare. King Louis XIV was a showman with an obsession. He was determined to fortify to the world his authority through display.
This he did with flawless splendor and attention to detail but with complete disregard to cost.
This disregard also meant indifference for the lives of the lowly peasants who suffered in order for him to achieve such greatness in the eyes of the world. Construction of Versailles continued day and night with as many as 40,000 workers toiling at a time, both men and women. Angry outbursts and insults were often shouted at him as he strolled through the construction sites. The workers were angry at his apparent ignorance of the poor conditions of their existence. Louis seemed perplexed that they were speaking about him. He was oblivious of how the third estate had to survive in order to promote his pompous flamboyant nature.
King Louis XIV fancied himself as being god-like, all powerful. In fact, he likened himself as Apollo, the sun god. The gardens of
Versailles, designed by André Le Nôtre, were fabricated as a tribute to Louis’s divinity. Throughout the gardens are statues of the Roman gods along with thirty nine fountains. Le Nôtre designed a portion of the estate’s gardens in a labyrinth with fountains within the maze. Each fountain depicted the animals from one of Aesop’s fables. The water which shoots from their mouths represents speech between the creatures, allowing them to express their thoughts and passions. This labyrinth of stories was designed for the sole purpose of educating King Louis’ son.
Besides the main palace, there is also the Grand Trianon. This was a little hideaway of sorts, where King Louis could escape the
rigors of his arduous life as king. The Grand Trianon allowed him to “kick back”, “let his hair down” (or in this case, his wigs) and not worry about the strict etiquette of the courts. It also allowed him a little privacy to be with his other mistresses, apart from the one who lived in the main palace, along with his wife. The Grand Trianon is a cozy one story cottage, constructed of pink marble.
This“Peyton Place” saga does not end with the death of King Louis XIV. King Louis XV added on to the expanse of Versailles yet another residence, the Petit Trianon. This was a two-story home built for his mistress. This “small” pink marble home was later given to Maria Antoniette, the wife of King Louis XVI as a gift on the day he was crowned king. Later, after she became queen, she had a little country hamlet built not far from Petit Trianon; a little getaway where she, her children and maidservants could enjoy the daily rituals of “farm life”; a chance to get back to the basics.
Should we look upon all of this extravagance and overindulgence with scorn? Pierre Bourdeiu has commented that “art and cultural consumption are predisposed, consciously and deliberately or not, to fulfill a social function of legitimating social differences. “ I believe that he means that one’s aesthetic nature is determined by the status one is born into. Therefore, from birth one is distanced from lower social groups and is guided to what is considered appropriate behavior for that social group. The socially wealthy elite have no concept of anything else. This is apparent in the puzzlement King Louis XIV experienced when he was accused of having an indifference to the third estate, the 98% of the population which slaved to pay their taxes to allocate him and all of his court to live in elaborate luxury.
King Louis XIV was determined to show the world that France was the greatest country in the world. This was to be exhibited through the display of riches and appreciated by all those who would visit the palace. I believe King Louis would be pleased to know that even today, the world looks upon his ornate Versailles in speechless awe. King Louis XIV succeeded; the sun god of Versailles undeniably established the
identity of his beloved France to the world.
Our trip today was monumental. We visited the Palace of Versailles, the
Palace of King Louis XIV. The construction of this palace is prodigious, far more exquisite than what one imagines in a castle. The palace is a showcase to the world, displaying glamour, glitz, and royal prestige beyond compare. King Louis XIV was a showman with an obsession. He was determined to fortify to the world his authority through display.
This he did with flawless splendor and attention to detail but with complete disregard to cost.
This disregard also meant indifference for the lives of the lowly peasants who suffered in order for him to achieve such greatness in the eyes of the world. Construction of Versailles continued day and night with as many as 40,000 workers toiling at a time, both men and women. Angry outbursts and insults were often shouted at him as he strolled through the construction sites. The workers were angry at his apparent ignorance of the poor conditions of their existence. Louis seemed perplexed that they were speaking about him. He was oblivious of how the third estate had to survive in order to promote his pompous flamboyant nature.
King Louis XIV fancied himself as being god-like, all powerful. In fact, he likened himself as Apollo, the sun god. The gardens of
Versailles, designed by André Le Nôtre, were fabricated as a tribute to Louis’s divinity. Throughout the gardens are statues of the Roman gods along with thirty nine fountains. Le Nôtre designed a portion of the estate’s gardens in a labyrinth with fountains within the maze. Each fountain depicted the animals from one of Aesop’s fables. The water which shoots from their mouths represents speech between the creatures, allowing them to express their thoughts and passions. This labyrinth of stories was designed for the sole purpose of educating King Louis’ son.
Besides the main palace, there is also the Grand Trianon. This was a little hideaway of sorts, where King Louis could escape the
rigors of his arduous life as king. The Grand Trianon allowed him to “kick back”, “let his hair down” (or in this case, his wigs) and not worry about the strict etiquette of the courts. It also allowed him a little privacy to be with his other mistresses, apart from the one who lived in the main palace, along with his wife. The Grand Trianon is a cozy one story cottage, constructed of pink marble.
This“Peyton Place” saga does not end with the death of King Louis XIV. King Louis XV added on to the expanse of Versailles yet another residence, the Petit Trianon. This was a two-story home built for his mistress. This “small” pink marble home was later given to Maria Antoniette, the wife of King Louis XVI as a gift on the day he was crowned king. Later, after she became queen, she had a little country hamlet built not far from Petit Trianon; a little getaway where she, her children and maidservants could enjoy the daily rituals of “farm life”; a chance to get back to the basics.
Should we look upon all of this extravagance and overindulgence with scorn? Pierre Bourdeiu has commented that “art and cultural consumption are predisposed, consciously and deliberately or not, to fulfill a social function of legitimating social differences. “ I believe that he means that one’s aesthetic nature is determined by the status one is born into. Therefore, from birth one is distanced from lower social groups and is guided to what is considered appropriate behavior for that social group. The socially wealthy elite have no concept of anything else. This is apparent in the puzzlement King Louis XIV experienced when he was accused of having an indifference to the third estate, the 98% of the population which slaved to pay their taxes to allocate him and all of his court to live in elaborate luxury.
King Louis XIV was determined to show the world that France was the greatest country in the world. This was to be exhibited through the display of riches and appreciated by all those who would visit the palace. I believe King Louis would be pleased to know that even today, the world looks upon his ornate Versailles in speechless awe. King Louis XIV succeeded; the sun god of Versailles undeniably established the
identity of his beloved France to the world.
The Panthéon
Today was an exhilarating day. You could feel the excitement in the air from everyone on the street. Today, July 14th, was Bastille Day,
which compares in equivalence to our July 4th.
In the afternoon, there was a big parade which we attended.
However, our focus before the parade was to visit the Panthéon.
The Panthéon is rather a unique place, for it is constructed to look like the Panthéon of Rome. However, the dome of this structure reminds me of some of the cathedrals; the dome is built to look like the dome of St. Paul’s Cathedral in England. Interestingly, the floor plan of the building is in the shape of the Greek cross. Actually, the Panthéon itself began as the Church of Ste. Geneviève. King Clovis and Queen Clotilde are buried here. King Clovis ruled in 500 AD, and is credited for defeating the Romans and beginning the Frankish (or Merovingian) Period. Instead of
celebrating the great battles of French history, the purpose of the Panthéon is to pay tribute to those who helped to shape the French Republic and the Nation.
The Panthéon is actually a mausoleum where 73 French men and woman are entombed. Among these famous individuals are Marie and Pierre Curie, Victor Hugo, Emile Zola, Jean Jacques Rousseau, and Voltaire. It is the philosophers and scientist s whom are being paid tribute to,
those that began the age of Enlightenment. Across the main entrance is etched in French: For Great Men, The Grateful Nation. By burying their great men, and women, in the Panthéon, France is giving tribute to the commemoration and admiration it [France] has received from the knowledge which those individuals have shared with the world. Interment can only be granted by a parliamentary act for “National Heroes”.
One of the drawing points for many who visit the Panthéon is Foucault’s pendulum which swings back and forth, suspended from the ceiling of the dome. At first, I was rather surprised to see this. Why here? Foucault first used the Panthéon to prove his experiment of showing the rotation of the earth. I suppose that he used this setting because of the height of the dome and because of the wide open space of the facility.
As I thought about the construction of the Panthéon and what it represented, I decided that the idea of using this place to illustrate the age of Enlightenment was rather fitting. Enlightenment is a process of thinking which analyzes and transforms all facets of society. Philosophers, such as Voltaire, believed in the separation of church and state. He [Voltaire] rejected the idea that religion is “rooted in the belief
that man’s life is controlled by destiny or supernatural beings.” The Panthéon began as a church and then was restructured to assimilate the appearance of the Panthéon of Rome. Rome is the center of philosophy, the great thinkers. So, there is a mixture of secular and non-secular ideology demonstrated both in construction and in implication related to this edifice. Fittingly, the conflict in this separation is evident in the populace of who resides within its walls.
Since tomorrow is Sunday, we are not scheduled to go anywhere in particular. I think I shall try to make it to mass at Notre Dame. Then perhaps I shall purchase a baguette at one of the food booths near the Reine and just enjoy the scenery and watching the passersby. A day to relax!
Today was an exhilarating day. You could feel the excitement in the air from everyone on the street. Today, July 14th, was Bastille Day,
which compares in equivalence to our July 4th.
In the afternoon, there was a big parade which we attended.
However, our focus before the parade was to visit the Panthéon.
The Panthéon is rather a unique place, for it is constructed to look like the Panthéon of Rome. However, the dome of this structure reminds me of some of the cathedrals; the dome is built to look like the dome of St. Paul’s Cathedral in England. Interestingly, the floor plan of the building is in the shape of the Greek cross. Actually, the Panthéon itself began as the Church of Ste. Geneviève. King Clovis and Queen Clotilde are buried here. King Clovis ruled in 500 AD, and is credited for defeating the Romans and beginning the Frankish (or Merovingian) Period. Instead of
celebrating the great battles of French history, the purpose of the Panthéon is to pay tribute to those who helped to shape the French Republic and the Nation.
The Panthéon is actually a mausoleum where 73 French men and woman are entombed. Among these famous individuals are Marie and Pierre Curie, Victor Hugo, Emile Zola, Jean Jacques Rousseau, and Voltaire. It is the philosophers and scientist s whom are being paid tribute to,
those that began the age of Enlightenment. Across the main entrance is etched in French: For Great Men, The Grateful Nation. By burying their great men, and women, in the Panthéon, France is giving tribute to the commemoration and admiration it [France] has received from the knowledge which those individuals have shared with the world. Interment can only be granted by a parliamentary act for “National Heroes”.
One of the drawing points for many who visit the Panthéon is Foucault’s pendulum which swings back and forth, suspended from the ceiling of the dome. At first, I was rather surprised to see this. Why here? Foucault first used the Panthéon to prove his experiment of showing the rotation of the earth. I suppose that he used this setting because of the height of the dome and because of the wide open space of the facility.
As I thought about the construction of the Panthéon and what it represented, I decided that the idea of using this place to illustrate the age of Enlightenment was rather fitting. Enlightenment is a process of thinking which analyzes and transforms all facets of society. Philosophers, such as Voltaire, believed in the separation of church and state. He [Voltaire] rejected the idea that religion is “rooted in the belief
that man’s life is controlled by destiny or supernatural beings.” The Panthéon began as a church and then was restructured to assimilate the appearance of the Panthéon of Rome. Rome is the center of philosophy, the great thinkers. So, there is a mixture of secular and non-secular ideology demonstrated both in construction and in implication related to this edifice. Fittingly, the conflict in this separation is evident in the populace of who resides within its walls.
Since tomorrow is Sunday, we are not scheduled to go anywhere in particular. I think I shall try to make it to mass at Notre Dame. Then perhaps I shall purchase a baguette at one of the food booths near the Reine and just enjoy the scenery and watching the passersby. A day to relax!
Bastille Day --- A National Holiday
As I mentioned previously in my journal entry about the Panthéon, today is/was Bastille Day.
All of France is exploding with excitement, as rightly they should be. Bastille Day is a national holiday, and France’s pride is quite evident everywhere you look. There are red, white, and
blue banners hanging from the balconies on many of the buildings as well as the French flag
being displayed in the sidewalk cafés. The camaraderie is evident as everyone, men and women alike greet each other with a hug and a kiss on the cheek. This greeting is typical; however, today
there is a greater amount of gusto in the action.
On Bastille Day, the French are paying tribute to the abolition of the French Monarchy and what would become the beginnings of the French Republic. There was a huge parade down the Champs-Elysées which of course goes right around the Arc de Triomphe. Watching the parade advance with the arch behind the parade participants was quite picturesque. There were representatives from every military branch. Many, such as the French National Guard, rode on horses. I was interested in the various styles of uniforms, some traditional, some more modern. I was also interested in how groups such as the French Firefighters were also included in the parade. Unlike our parades, there were not any floats. Actually, I rather liked it.
In addition to the squadrons of men, there were also the motorcyclist squadron of the French National gendamerie, the French Infantry (comprised of tanks and jeeps), and the French Navy Pipe Band (that was neat!). Several military schools were also represented. Then flying overhead there was a formation of military helicopters, as well as several groups of alpha jets which ejected red, white, and blue smoke
across the sky. It was beautiful! The crowd cheered as each group passed. Very impressive!
Since Paris is the capital of France, the French president was also in attendance, President Francois Hollande. His motorcade led the
parade, the people applauding as he passed. Close to the end of the parade route, a platform had been constructed which was where President Hollande sat to view the remainder of the parade. As each military group passed, they saluted him, showing their respect to their beloved leader.
As I mentioned, the parade route passed around the Arc de Triomphe, the Parisian icon which is the center point of the twelve main entrances to the city. Although most people identify in their minds the Eiffel Tower when they speak of Paris, for me, it is the Arch of
Triumph. The arch was built in 1806. The main purpose of its erection was to pay tribute to all of those who died in the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic wars. Interestingly, and perhaps hypocritically, triumphal entrance beneath its arch has been celebrated not only by the French armies but the Germans as well. Beneath the Arch lies the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, one whose body represents all of those French
patriots who lost their lives during World War I. A flame perpetually burns at the base of the tomb, in memory of the dead who were
never identified during World War I and World War II.
As Americans, we see a correlation of this monument with our eternal flame which burns next to the grave of President Kennedy in Arlington Cemetery. Truth be known, it was our own First Lady, Jacqueline Kennedy, who requested the flame to be constructed, taking the idea from France, her paternal great-great-grandfather’s native country.
In reflecting on the celebration of this national holiday, the question arises as to whether the festivities displayed on Bastille Day are not actually anachronistic in nature. Are these brazen displays of military force actually portraying an underlying warning of revolution and military capability? Personally, I do not see it as such. The exuberance by which the French celebrate “Liberté, Equalité, et Fraternité", might very well be what is lacking in our own country’s national holiday. The focus of our Fourth of July celebration revolves around cookouts, beer, and fireworks. How many of our hometown parades, for those municipalities which have such, honor the backbone of our nation’s security?
Yes, the tall ships and many of our navy’s battleships congregate in New York Harbor, under the watchful eye of the Statue of Liberty.
However, for the most part, the emphasis of our national commemoration has become quite commercialized. It is a day that we look forward to because we do not have to work. How many of us take the time to sincerely and prayerfully thank God for those brave men and women who fought to defend our country for the sake of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”? Perhaps, we should reevaluate where the importance of our principles lie. We should reestablish the pride and allegiance the French demonstrate in our own spirit of patriotism.
As I mentioned previously in my journal entry about the Panthéon, today is/was Bastille Day.
All of France is exploding with excitement, as rightly they should be. Bastille Day is a national holiday, and France’s pride is quite evident everywhere you look. There are red, white, and
blue banners hanging from the balconies on many of the buildings as well as the French flag
being displayed in the sidewalk cafés. The camaraderie is evident as everyone, men and women alike greet each other with a hug and a kiss on the cheek. This greeting is typical; however, today
there is a greater amount of gusto in the action.
On Bastille Day, the French are paying tribute to the abolition of the French Monarchy and what would become the beginnings of the French Republic. There was a huge parade down the Champs-Elysées which of course goes right around the Arc de Triomphe. Watching the parade advance with the arch behind the parade participants was quite picturesque. There were representatives from every military branch. Many, such as the French National Guard, rode on horses. I was interested in the various styles of uniforms, some traditional, some more modern. I was also interested in how groups such as the French Firefighters were also included in the parade. Unlike our parades, there were not any floats. Actually, I rather liked it.
In addition to the squadrons of men, there were also the motorcyclist squadron of the French National gendamerie, the French Infantry (comprised of tanks and jeeps), and the French Navy Pipe Band (that was neat!). Several military schools were also represented. Then flying overhead there was a formation of military helicopters, as well as several groups of alpha jets which ejected red, white, and blue smoke
across the sky. It was beautiful! The crowd cheered as each group passed. Very impressive!
Since Paris is the capital of France, the French president was also in attendance, President Francois Hollande. His motorcade led the
parade, the people applauding as he passed. Close to the end of the parade route, a platform had been constructed which was where President Hollande sat to view the remainder of the parade. As each military group passed, they saluted him, showing their respect to their beloved leader.
As I mentioned, the parade route passed around the Arc de Triomphe, the Parisian icon which is the center point of the twelve main entrances to the city. Although most people identify in their minds the Eiffel Tower when they speak of Paris, for me, it is the Arch of
Triumph. The arch was built in 1806. The main purpose of its erection was to pay tribute to all of those who died in the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic wars. Interestingly, and perhaps hypocritically, triumphal entrance beneath its arch has been celebrated not only by the French armies but the Germans as well. Beneath the Arch lies the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, one whose body represents all of those French
patriots who lost their lives during World War I. A flame perpetually burns at the base of the tomb, in memory of the dead who were
never identified during World War I and World War II.
As Americans, we see a correlation of this monument with our eternal flame which burns next to the grave of President Kennedy in Arlington Cemetery. Truth be known, it was our own First Lady, Jacqueline Kennedy, who requested the flame to be constructed, taking the idea from France, her paternal great-great-grandfather’s native country.
In reflecting on the celebration of this national holiday, the question arises as to whether the festivities displayed on Bastille Day are not actually anachronistic in nature. Are these brazen displays of military force actually portraying an underlying warning of revolution and military capability? Personally, I do not see it as such. The exuberance by which the French celebrate “Liberté, Equalité, et Fraternité", might very well be what is lacking in our own country’s national holiday. The focus of our Fourth of July celebration revolves around cookouts, beer, and fireworks. How many of our hometown parades, for those municipalities which have such, honor the backbone of our nation’s security?
Yes, the tall ships and many of our navy’s battleships congregate in New York Harbor, under the watchful eye of the Statue of Liberty.
However, for the most part, the emphasis of our national commemoration has become quite commercialized. It is a day that we look forward to because we do not have to work. How many of us take the time to sincerely and prayerfully thank God for those brave men and women who fought to defend our country for the sake of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”? Perhaps, we should reevaluate where the importance of our principles lie. We should reestablish the pride and allegiance the French demonstrate in our own spirit of patriotism.
Sacré Coeur and Montmartre
The Montmartre is the name of the butte on which the beautiful Sacré
Coeur stands. (It is also the name of the “neighborhood below, but I shall discuss that momentarily.) This church is also known as the Basilica of Sacred Heart. From the
outside, the church is a mixture of Roman, Gothic and eastern style architecture. It gleams white against the Parisian sky. It is interesting why it is so white. The entire building is made of travertine which interestingly excudes calcite. Therefore, the building is constantly being bleached, which is how it maintains its glistening whiteness
despite the Parisian pollution. The architecture of the church is called Romanesque-Byzantine. An excellent description of this type of design is the “wedding cake ” appearance, which is quite befitting. Due to its architectural style the
church appears to be very old, however, its construction was completed in 1914.
The purpose in building this church was to show tribute to the approximately 58,000 commoners which were executed during the Paris Commune of 1871. This was a bloody battle between the working class and the ruling party, which seems to have been backed by the
church. The building of the church was a way to atone for the crimes of the Communards. It’s a good thing the Commune only lasted a few months. It is said that during “bloody week” which occurred in May of 1871, the number of people who were killed was between 20,000 and 25,000. This was more than the number who died during the French Revolution and the Reign of Terror of 1793!
The inside of the church is beautiful. The giant mosaic on the ceiling over the main alter shows Jesus, the Adoration of the Sacred
Heart. What is odd about this mosaic is the other people represented in it. There is Archangel Michael and Joan of Arc on the right side of Jesus and King Louis XVI and his family on the left.
Another oddity of this church is the entrance. There are three arches; above the middle arch is a statue of Jesus. Above the other two arches is a bronze statue of Joan of Arc atop her horse on one side, and the other arch has King Louis the Blessed atop his horse. King Louis IX is honored because of the pious life he lead and because of his efforts to rescue the Holy Lands from the Turks. Joan of Arc is the French national saint. She is honored because of her stance that the French army should fight to win during the Hundred Years War, and not just ‘play’ at war. She also helped to end the suffering of the common people and bring peace to the war ravaged kingdom.
In order to get to the church itself, you have to climb a great many steps, or ride the funicular. I decided to climb the steps. It seemed only fitting; I felt as though I was on a pilgrimage.
Below the church is the Montmartre. It is the neighborhood of shops which are mostly run by the Bohemians. This is a fancy way of saying gypsies. The streets of shops remind me of the shops found in Mexico. They are placed right next to each other, a continuous line.
There are restaurants, cafés, bakeries, art shops, clothing shops, and perfume shops. You have to be very careful when walking down these narrow streets, for pick-pockets abound. The little parks have artists galore set up, ready to paint your portrait or do a caricature. The cabarets seem to line just certain streets. These streets have LOTS of shops selling porn, very risqué clothing, and anything you can think of in the line of sex, and probably things you’ve never thought of before. In case you are wondering, no, I didn’t go to any of these, not even a cabaret.
It seems rather strange that this gorgeous church is right in the middle of all of this. Even as you climb the steps up to the church, there are people playing violins or guitars, hoping that you will give them some money for their talents. This all reminded me of the story in the Bible where the people had turned the temple into a market place, buying and selling of their wares, complete with animals. All of this bartering is going on at the foot of Sacré Coeur. To add to that, people are picnicking on the lawn around the church, meals complete with a bottle of
wine. It just does not seem like the correct thing to do. Oh well, this is their country, their city, their way of life. I must respect that, even if I don’t agree with it.
Tomorrow, we are off to the Musée de Rodin. Our time here in Paris is quickly slipping away.
The Montmartre is the name of the butte on which the beautiful Sacré
Coeur stands. (It is also the name of the “neighborhood below, but I shall discuss that momentarily.) This church is also known as the Basilica of Sacred Heart. From the
outside, the church is a mixture of Roman, Gothic and eastern style architecture. It gleams white against the Parisian sky. It is interesting why it is so white. The entire building is made of travertine which interestingly excudes calcite. Therefore, the building is constantly being bleached, which is how it maintains its glistening whiteness
despite the Parisian pollution. The architecture of the church is called Romanesque-Byzantine. An excellent description of this type of design is the “wedding cake ” appearance, which is quite befitting. Due to its architectural style the
church appears to be very old, however, its construction was completed in 1914.
The purpose in building this church was to show tribute to the approximately 58,000 commoners which were executed during the Paris Commune of 1871. This was a bloody battle between the working class and the ruling party, which seems to have been backed by the
church. The building of the church was a way to atone for the crimes of the Communards. It’s a good thing the Commune only lasted a few months. It is said that during “bloody week” which occurred in May of 1871, the number of people who were killed was between 20,000 and 25,000. This was more than the number who died during the French Revolution and the Reign of Terror of 1793!
The inside of the church is beautiful. The giant mosaic on the ceiling over the main alter shows Jesus, the Adoration of the Sacred
Heart. What is odd about this mosaic is the other people represented in it. There is Archangel Michael and Joan of Arc on the right side of Jesus and King Louis XVI and his family on the left.
Another oddity of this church is the entrance. There are three arches; above the middle arch is a statue of Jesus. Above the other two arches is a bronze statue of Joan of Arc atop her horse on one side, and the other arch has King Louis the Blessed atop his horse. King Louis IX is honored because of the pious life he lead and because of his efforts to rescue the Holy Lands from the Turks. Joan of Arc is the French national saint. She is honored because of her stance that the French army should fight to win during the Hundred Years War, and not just ‘play’ at war. She also helped to end the suffering of the common people and bring peace to the war ravaged kingdom.
In order to get to the church itself, you have to climb a great many steps, or ride the funicular. I decided to climb the steps. It seemed only fitting; I felt as though I was on a pilgrimage.
Below the church is the Montmartre. It is the neighborhood of shops which are mostly run by the Bohemians. This is a fancy way of saying gypsies. The streets of shops remind me of the shops found in Mexico. They are placed right next to each other, a continuous line.
There are restaurants, cafés, bakeries, art shops, clothing shops, and perfume shops. You have to be very careful when walking down these narrow streets, for pick-pockets abound. The little parks have artists galore set up, ready to paint your portrait or do a caricature. The cabarets seem to line just certain streets. These streets have LOTS of shops selling porn, very risqué clothing, and anything you can think of in the line of sex, and probably things you’ve never thought of before. In case you are wondering, no, I didn’t go to any of these, not even a cabaret.
It seems rather strange that this gorgeous church is right in the middle of all of this. Even as you climb the steps up to the church, there are people playing violins or guitars, hoping that you will give them some money for their talents. This all reminded me of the story in the Bible where the people had turned the temple into a market place, buying and selling of their wares, complete with animals. All of this bartering is going on at the foot of Sacré Coeur. To add to that, people are picnicking on the lawn around the church, meals complete with a bottle of
wine. It just does not seem like the correct thing to do. Oh well, this is their country, their city, their way of life. I must respect that, even if I don’t agree with it.
Tomorrow, we are off to the Musée de Rodin. Our time here in Paris is quickly slipping away.
Musée de Rodin
When I learned that we were going to a museum which exhibited sculpture, I prepared myself for seeing more of the Roman and Greek art. Obviously, I knew nothing of what we were to see.
It has been said that Auguste Rodin is the Father of Modern Art. At first, I did not know how to
interpret that. But after seeing his work, I believe that what it means is that he returned to where the ancient
artists of the Greek and Roman left off, and then advanced from there. The finesse he projects with his talent
is unbelievable.
“Every part of the human figure is expressive. And is not an artist always isolating; since in Nature nothing is isolated.” (Auguste Rodin) What sets Rodin apart from the works we have already seen is that his art has motion, it has a soul. You can feel the agony, the love, the sensuality in his figures. Instead of
sculpting figures of known gods and goddesses, he sculpts figures which could be anyone of us. When one
gazes at Cupid and Psyche embraced in each other’s arms, you can feel the passion. As I looked at the face of The Thought, I remembered seeing that same look in the eyes and face of one of my students at school; it was as though they were totally in another place, their thoughts had removed them to another dimension. I saw that same look in The Thought.
Something else that I noticed in Rodin’s figures is how exacting he is in the anatomy of the models. Their muscles and tendons show strength, their veins look as though blood is actually pumping through them. It was interesting to learn why some of his pieces appeared to be “unfinished”. The figure of Eve, in the duo Adam and Eve, has a dimpled effect of the skin compared to the smooth polished finish of Adam. I learned that the model he was using when sculpting Eve did not tell Rodin that she was pregnant. One day, she did not come back for her scheduled sitting. He did not finish the statue, for it really was not complete. With other statues, one wonders why he did not include the head, or the arms, or other seemingly “missing“ body parts. Rodin is to have said that just because the body does not have an arm does not mean the body is not complete. The feeling he wished to portray does not have to come from a body which has every single part.
I am so glad that Mme LaLonde scheduled us to visit the Musée de Rodin. There have been three places which left me with a deep feeling of reflection. Those places have been Notre Dame, Versailles, and Museé de Rodin. The basis of the reflection is brought forth from totally different reasons. Notre Dame moved me spiritually, Versailles left me feeling remorseful, and Museé de Rodin touched me passionately.
I can see why so many people love Paris; it stirs the emotions.
When I learned that we were going to a museum which exhibited sculpture, I prepared myself for seeing more of the Roman and Greek art. Obviously, I knew nothing of what we were to see.
It has been said that Auguste Rodin is the Father of Modern Art. At first, I did not know how to
interpret that. But after seeing his work, I believe that what it means is that he returned to where the ancient
artists of the Greek and Roman left off, and then advanced from there. The finesse he projects with his talent
is unbelievable.
“Every part of the human figure is expressive. And is not an artist always isolating; since in Nature nothing is isolated.” (Auguste Rodin) What sets Rodin apart from the works we have already seen is that his art has motion, it has a soul. You can feel the agony, the love, the sensuality in his figures. Instead of
sculpting figures of known gods and goddesses, he sculpts figures which could be anyone of us. When one
gazes at Cupid and Psyche embraced in each other’s arms, you can feel the passion. As I looked at the face of The Thought, I remembered seeing that same look in the eyes and face of one of my students at school; it was as though they were totally in another place, their thoughts had removed them to another dimension. I saw that same look in The Thought.
Something else that I noticed in Rodin’s figures is how exacting he is in the anatomy of the models. Their muscles and tendons show strength, their veins look as though blood is actually pumping through them. It was interesting to learn why some of his pieces appeared to be “unfinished”. The figure of Eve, in the duo Adam and Eve, has a dimpled effect of the skin compared to the smooth polished finish of Adam. I learned that the model he was using when sculpting Eve did not tell Rodin that she was pregnant. One day, she did not come back for her scheduled sitting. He did not finish the statue, for it really was not complete. With other statues, one wonders why he did not include the head, or the arms, or other seemingly “missing“ body parts. Rodin is to have said that just because the body does not have an arm does not mean the body is not complete. The feeling he wished to portray does not have to come from a body which has every single part.
I am so glad that Mme LaLonde scheduled us to visit the Musée de Rodin. There have been three places which left me with a deep feeling of reflection. Those places have been Notre Dame, Versailles, and Museé de Rodin. The basis of the reflection is brought forth from totally different reasons. Notre Dame moved me spiritually, Versailles left me feeling remorseful, and Museé de Rodin touched me passionately.
I can see why so many people love Paris; it stirs the emotions.
Quai d’Orsay Museum
Today’s visit to the Quai d’Orsay Museum was very interesting and thought provoking.
We went there to learn about the era of Impressionism in art. It seems that Impressionism centered in the vicinity of Paris. Why? Maybe it is because the culture here does not seem to be as intimidated about expressing exactly how they feel about things, that “take it or leave it” attitude.
The artists such as Manet, Monet, Van Gogh, Sisley, to name a few, were
revolutionary in the art world. Their style was looked down upon by most of
the art world because of the vivid colors they used and because they actually
painted what they saw. They captured their feelings in their art rather than painting what the public expected of them. If these artists painted scenes of nature, it was because they themselves had stepped out of their studios and had seen what was portrayed on the canvas. This was unheard of! The artists of the
Impressionistic era expressed how they saw Nature, their interpretation of the emotions relayed from what they saw, rather than simply trying to recreate an exact representation of what they saw.
Impressionistic art is rather scientific in its application. The artist is showing on canvas not only the effects of the light on his subject but also the effects of movement and how each changes the appearance of the object. Rather than the painting being a “snapshot” of the object, frozen in that moment, it is as if the painting is part of a movie, showing movement and the passing of time.
The artist Manet was criticized to the point that one of his paintings, “Lunch on the Lawn”, was banned from the Académie Royale des Beaux Arts. The painting shows a nude woman sitting on the ground along with two men, “respectable men”, obviously of the upper class, in a park. It appears that they have just finished eating as the remnants of lunch are still scattered on the ground next to the area where they are seated. As I studied the painting, I did not understand why the critics had been so judgmental about the nudity portrayed in this painting. After all, nudity has been a common theme in all of the art forms we have scrutinized while we have been in Paris. The difference however, is that this woman is sitting with and enjoying the company of two gentlemen of a higher class, who are clothed. This symbolized that the woman is a
prostitute. The implication of such did not go over well with the art critics of the day.
Another such controversial painting of Manet’s is his “Olympia”. He was equally criticized for this painting. When comparing
“Olympia” to Titan’s “Venus”, the critics felt that the portrayal of the woman was quite distasteful. Venus’ nude body is delicately positioned on a fashionable daybed, with a sheet elegantly draped on the bed’s surface beneath her. Behind her is her maidservant, dressed in a flowing gown, and is in the process of straightening up the room, a little puppy at her feet. The expression on Venus’ face is that of innocence, almost shyness. However, Olympia is provocatively positioned on her bed, the sheets and pillows rumpled. Olympia’s maidservant, a black woman dressed in typical plain servant attire complete with a headscarf, has brought in a bouquet of flowers. At the foot of the bed is a black cat, back arched. Olympia has a confrontational look on her face. What is the difference? Dear sweet Venus is, after all, the goddess of love, beauty, oh yes, and sex. Olympia is, well… she isn’t a goddess. In fact, oh my, Olympia is a-----prostitute!
Perhaps it is difficult for those of us today living in a world which puts me first and “tells it like it is” to realize the huge upset the artists of impressionism caused. These artists painted how they felt and what they saw in life, in Nature. They painted people from normal walks of life, not just the upper class, the elite, the famous. Many times their paintings reflected the turmoil which was occurring in their own personal lives. Much of what they painted the world can identify with today.
Today’s visit to the Quai d’Orsay Museum was very interesting and thought provoking.
We went there to learn about the era of Impressionism in art. It seems that Impressionism centered in the vicinity of Paris. Why? Maybe it is because the culture here does not seem to be as intimidated about expressing exactly how they feel about things, that “take it or leave it” attitude.
The artists such as Manet, Monet, Van Gogh, Sisley, to name a few, were
revolutionary in the art world. Their style was looked down upon by most of
the art world because of the vivid colors they used and because they actually
painted what they saw. They captured their feelings in their art rather than painting what the public expected of them. If these artists painted scenes of nature, it was because they themselves had stepped out of their studios and had seen what was portrayed on the canvas. This was unheard of! The artists of the
Impressionistic era expressed how they saw Nature, their interpretation of the emotions relayed from what they saw, rather than simply trying to recreate an exact representation of what they saw.
Impressionistic art is rather scientific in its application. The artist is showing on canvas not only the effects of the light on his subject but also the effects of movement and how each changes the appearance of the object. Rather than the painting being a “snapshot” of the object, frozen in that moment, it is as if the painting is part of a movie, showing movement and the passing of time.
The artist Manet was criticized to the point that one of his paintings, “Lunch on the Lawn”, was banned from the Académie Royale des Beaux Arts. The painting shows a nude woman sitting on the ground along with two men, “respectable men”, obviously of the upper class, in a park. It appears that they have just finished eating as the remnants of lunch are still scattered on the ground next to the area where they are seated. As I studied the painting, I did not understand why the critics had been so judgmental about the nudity portrayed in this painting. After all, nudity has been a common theme in all of the art forms we have scrutinized while we have been in Paris. The difference however, is that this woman is sitting with and enjoying the company of two gentlemen of a higher class, who are clothed. This symbolized that the woman is a
prostitute. The implication of such did not go over well with the art critics of the day.
Another such controversial painting of Manet’s is his “Olympia”. He was equally criticized for this painting. When comparing
“Olympia” to Titan’s “Venus”, the critics felt that the portrayal of the woman was quite distasteful. Venus’ nude body is delicately positioned on a fashionable daybed, with a sheet elegantly draped on the bed’s surface beneath her. Behind her is her maidservant, dressed in a flowing gown, and is in the process of straightening up the room, a little puppy at her feet. The expression on Venus’ face is that of innocence, almost shyness. However, Olympia is provocatively positioned on her bed, the sheets and pillows rumpled. Olympia’s maidservant, a black woman dressed in typical plain servant attire complete with a headscarf, has brought in a bouquet of flowers. At the foot of the bed is a black cat, back arched. Olympia has a confrontational look on her face. What is the difference? Dear sweet Venus is, after all, the goddess of love, beauty, oh yes, and sex. Olympia is, well… she isn’t a goddess. In fact, oh my, Olympia is a-----prostitute!
Perhaps it is difficult for those of us today living in a world which puts me first and “tells it like it is” to realize the huge upset the artists of impressionism caused. These artists painted how they felt and what they saw in life, in Nature. They painted people from normal walks of life, not just the upper class, the elite, the famous. Many times their paintings reflected the turmoil which was occurring in their own personal lives. Much of what they painted the world can identify with today.
Musée d’art Moderne
&
Pompidou
Today, we had an excursion to both the Musée d’art Moderne and to Le Centre National d’art et de culture George Pompidou. While both places are important in regards to the study of art, they were not my favorite places to visit; this is not my cup of tea.
The age of Modern art began in the 1860s and continued until the 1970s. Therefore, the artists that we studied yesterday who began the age of Impressionism were the forefathers of what became Modern Art. It is amazing the changes which took place from the paintings of Van Gogh to those of Piet Mondrian. The critics who condemned Manet might very well turn over in their graves upon seeing “Le Pigeon“ by Picasso or the sculptures by Yves Klein. It seems as though the closer the timeline neared to the 1970s, the greater the absence of feeling and emotion was portrayed in the artwork. The connection between the “masterpiece” and the viewer became more and more remote.
The Post-Modern era rejected the trends of those in the Modern Age. This timeframe embraced the Information Age. However, the artists of this epoch seemed to reject the foundations and value systems of those that created it. Their artwork showed not only disillusionment but also an alienation from what had been called traditional art. They broke the barriers of the styles of the past and produced themes of modern day contexts. Their artistic statements may have become bolder but the emotional connections became colder.
Those artists who created their masterpieces during this modern art age did seem very radical compared to what had traditionally been created before. It seems that the artists were striving towards a quest of identity. Perhaps the events of two world wars added to the unsettledness and void of spirit the artists of that time felt. As time passed, the world continued to be plagued by war and fear of the
unknown, which may have attributed to the apparent nihilistic trends. The viewer might relate to what was projected on the canvas or from the sculpture, but knowledge of the artist’s interpretation of his creation was unidentifiable. There was no mutual construal between viewer and
creator.
Le Centre National d’art et de culture George Pompidou is a continuation of the oddness and abstract I observed at the Museum of Modern Art. I found the architectural history of the Center to be more interesting than the art within. The Center looks terribly out of place, the contrast between modern and old world within just a few blocks of each other. However, this is perhaps what President Pompidou wished to impose on the world. Is this not similar to Napoleon’s wish, to impress the world in the construction of the Eiffel Tower by showcasing France’s engineering endeavors? History seems to have repeated itself in Pompidou’s desire to present to the world a center dedicated to the
inspiration of the cultural spirit within us all.
Within this structure of pipes and glass, the masters of abstract art abound. Works by Picabia, Picasso, Modiglani, Leger, Breton, Klein (to name only a few), line the labyrinth of corridors, floor after floor. There are displays on canvas, of metal, glass, hair, headphones, wood, and twisted cloth. Much of what you see leaves you questioning the intent of the artist. Often you are not even sure why the display is considered
“art”. An excellent example is the urinal I viewed. Why??? I can only imagine that the artist was feeling a need to “relieve” himself from the
pressures of the day. But is this really something you want to share with the world? Oh well, to each his own.
Tomorrow we are off to the Natural History Museum. I believe that I will relate more readily to the exhibits there. At least, I will have a clearer understanding of what exactly I am looking at and why I should be appreciating it. My hope for the art world is that the future artists will reestablish a more personable and passionate connection with their innovations, and thus bond the viewer’s interpretation into a trifold effect.
&
Pompidou
Today, we had an excursion to both the Musée d’art Moderne and to Le Centre National d’art et de culture George Pompidou. While both places are important in regards to the study of art, they were not my favorite places to visit; this is not my cup of tea.
The age of Modern art began in the 1860s and continued until the 1970s. Therefore, the artists that we studied yesterday who began the age of Impressionism were the forefathers of what became Modern Art. It is amazing the changes which took place from the paintings of Van Gogh to those of Piet Mondrian. The critics who condemned Manet might very well turn over in their graves upon seeing “Le Pigeon“ by Picasso or the sculptures by Yves Klein. It seems as though the closer the timeline neared to the 1970s, the greater the absence of feeling and emotion was portrayed in the artwork. The connection between the “masterpiece” and the viewer became more and more remote.
The Post-Modern era rejected the trends of those in the Modern Age. This timeframe embraced the Information Age. However, the artists of this epoch seemed to reject the foundations and value systems of those that created it. Their artwork showed not only disillusionment but also an alienation from what had been called traditional art. They broke the barriers of the styles of the past and produced themes of modern day contexts. Their artistic statements may have become bolder but the emotional connections became colder.
Those artists who created their masterpieces during this modern art age did seem very radical compared to what had traditionally been created before. It seems that the artists were striving towards a quest of identity. Perhaps the events of two world wars added to the unsettledness and void of spirit the artists of that time felt. As time passed, the world continued to be plagued by war and fear of the
unknown, which may have attributed to the apparent nihilistic trends. The viewer might relate to what was projected on the canvas or from the sculpture, but knowledge of the artist’s interpretation of his creation was unidentifiable. There was no mutual construal between viewer and
creator.
Le Centre National d’art et de culture George Pompidou is a continuation of the oddness and abstract I observed at the Museum of Modern Art. I found the architectural history of the Center to be more interesting than the art within. The Center looks terribly out of place, the contrast between modern and old world within just a few blocks of each other. However, this is perhaps what President Pompidou wished to impose on the world. Is this not similar to Napoleon’s wish, to impress the world in the construction of the Eiffel Tower by showcasing France’s engineering endeavors? History seems to have repeated itself in Pompidou’s desire to present to the world a center dedicated to the
inspiration of the cultural spirit within us all.
Within this structure of pipes and glass, the masters of abstract art abound. Works by Picabia, Picasso, Modiglani, Leger, Breton, Klein (to name only a few), line the labyrinth of corridors, floor after floor. There are displays on canvas, of metal, glass, hair, headphones, wood, and twisted cloth. Much of what you see leaves you questioning the intent of the artist. Often you are not even sure why the display is considered
“art”. An excellent example is the urinal I viewed. Why??? I can only imagine that the artist was feeling a need to “relieve” himself from the
pressures of the day. But is this really something you want to share with the world? Oh well, to each his own.
Tomorrow we are off to the Natural History Museum. I believe that I will relate more readily to the exhibits there. At least, I will have a clearer understanding of what exactly I am looking at and why I should be appreciating it. My hope for the art world is that the future artists will reestablish a more personable and passionate connection with their innovations, and thus bond the viewer’s interpretation into a trifold effect.
Museum of Natural History
Our time in Paris has nearly come to a close. When we arrived, we went back in time to the beginning of the universe. In a whirlwind of twelve days, we have time warped to the present.
It is dizzying to try and comprehend the vast amount of history we have covered. Today, we visited the Museum of Natural History which allowed us to step back once again to the age of the dinosaurs, a leap backwards of more than 65 million years.
Upon entering the museum, you are greeted by what appears to be a mass
exodus of animals. The thought crossed my mind that perhaps they were in route to Noah’s ark. There were elephants, water buffalo, lions, iguanas, giraffes, hippopotamuses, and platypuses, practically everything you could think of appearing to be making their way out of the building. The main difference in their exodus and that which occurred in the time of Noah was that behind them were the skeletons of several dinosaurs. The enormity of these prehistoric creatures made even the largest elephant appear dwarfed.
There are five levels to the museum. The museum covers every aspect of existence of both plants and animals. It was fascinating. I
especially enjoyed the gallery of paleontology. Here you can walk amongst the truly great giants of our world. Such a noisy world it must have been! Even the noise level of New York City probably does not come close to the decibel level that these monstrous reptiles produced.
Although I stood in awe of their size, I was thankful that it was only their skeletons I was observing and not actual living, breathing
dinosaurs!
The museum’s exhibits are not just enveloped within its walls; the Jardin des plantes beautifully decorates the landscape outside. I
wandered around midst the well groomed flowerbeds which displayed every shade of color imaginable. Many of the plants I recognized as being the same as those grown in our warm south Texas climate. It made me feel a twinge of homesickness as I reflected on the perfectly manicured jardins. As I stood there admiring the view, I felt as though I was in one of Monet’s paintings. Perhaps he would have called it, “Woman in the
Garden”.
As I strolled through the pathways on the museum’s grounds, I found myself contemplating where exactly human-kind fits in the puzzle of life. What exactly does it mean to be “human”? This thought has been discussed at length by many great philosophers both current and of the past. To say that we are different from other species because we have intelligence is certainly false, for it is known that chimpanzees and dolphins are extremely intelligent. It would also be incorrect to say that we are different because we can solve problems. Again, the chimpanzees and dolphins have proven to be able to do that. Could it be because we can remember? False again, for experiments with elephants show that they remember very well minute details. So, what does make us different?
I believe the answer lies in how we are able to reason. This reasoning can involve simply our own self, or it can encompass reasoning with others. We can form hypotheses and collect data to prove or disprove those scientific guesses. We can record our history, form opinions as to what we have learned from the past, and imagine what the future holds. This is what sets our species apart from the rest of those magnificent creatures with which we share our little planet.
Does this make the human race superior to the other species? Superiority of a species revolves around how that species uses its intelligence. If the actions of the species results in its demise and the termination of vast numbers of other species, then how is it possible to say that the species is superior. God gave human-kind superior intelligence. That does not mean that man is equal to God. If we were equal, then the downfall of our planet could not be attributed to our actions. The blame would therefore be pointed in the direction of countless
other species or to Nature. What human-kind does with this gift of superior intelligence will be the epiphany of our destiny.
Tomorrow is our last full day in Paris. It is with mixed emotions that I anticipate my departure from this city of flamboyance, culture, and
history. I have learned so much, I have so much to learn.
Our time in Paris has nearly come to a close. When we arrived, we went back in time to the beginning of the universe. In a whirlwind of twelve days, we have time warped to the present.
It is dizzying to try and comprehend the vast amount of history we have covered. Today, we visited the Museum of Natural History which allowed us to step back once again to the age of the dinosaurs, a leap backwards of more than 65 million years.
Upon entering the museum, you are greeted by what appears to be a mass
exodus of animals. The thought crossed my mind that perhaps they were in route to Noah’s ark. There were elephants, water buffalo, lions, iguanas, giraffes, hippopotamuses, and platypuses, practically everything you could think of appearing to be making their way out of the building. The main difference in their exodus and that which occurred in the time of Noah was that behind them were the skeletons of several dinosaurs. The enormity of these prehistoric creatures made even the largest elephant appear dwarfed.
There are five levels to the museum. The museum covers every aspect of existence of both plants and animals. It was fascinating. I
especially enjoyed the gallery of paleontology. Here you can walk amongst the truly great giants of our world. Such a noisy world it must have been! Even the noise level of New York City probably does not come close to the decibel level that these monstrous reptiles produced.
Although I stood in awe of their size, I was thankful that it was only their skeletons I was observing and not actual living, breathing
dinosaurs!
The museum’s exhibits are not just enveloped within its walls; the Jardin des plantes beautifully decorates the landscape outside. I
wandered around midst the well groomed flowerbeds which displayed every shade of color imaginable. Many of the plants I recognized as being the same as those grown in our warm south Texas climate. It made me feel a twinge of homesickness as I reflected on the perfectly manicured jardins. As I stood there admiring the view, I felt as though I was in one of Monet’s paintings. Perhaps he would have called it, “Woman in the
Garden”.
As I strolled through the pathways on the museum’s grounds, I found myself contemplating where exactly human-kind fits in the puzzle of life. What exactly does it mean to be “human”? This thought has been discussed at length by many great philosophers both current and of the past. To say that we are different from other species because we have intelligence is certainly false, for it is known that chimpanzees and dolphins are extremely intelligent. It would also be incorrect to say that we are different because we can solve problems. Again, the chimpanzees and dolphins have proven to be able to do that. Could it be because we can remember? False again, for experiments with elephants show that they remember very well minute details. So, what does make us different?
I believe the answer lies in how we are able to reason. This reasoning can involve simply our own self, or it can encompass reasoning with others. We can form hypotheses and collect data to prove or disprove those scientific guesses. We can record our history, form opinions as to what we have learned from the past, and imagine what the future holds. This is what sets our species apart from the rest of those magnificent creatures with which we share our little planet.
Does this make the human race superior to the other species? Superiority of a species revolves around how that species uses its intelligence. If the actions of the species results in its demise and the termination of vast numbers of other species, then how is it possible to say that the species is superior. God gave human-kind superior intelligence. That does not mean that man is equal to God. If we were equal, then the downfall of our planet could not be attributed to our actions. The blame would therefore be pointed in the direction of countless
other species or to Nature. What human-kind does with this gift of superior intelligence will be the epiphany of our destiny.
Tomorrow is our last full day in Paris. It is with mixed emotions that I anticipate my departure from this city of flamboyance, culture, and
history. I have learned so much, I have so much to learn.
Musée du Cinéma
We had finished our tour of the Museum of Natural History earlier than expected, so
after grabbing a quick bite to eat, Mme LaLonde suggested that we take in a movie.
Such a treat! However, that was not all she had planned for us. To begin with, we needed to understand how, “take one”, cinematography is deemed an art form. Then, “take two”, we would view a film.
When considering the cinema as art, most people probably think of how the actors are the artists, as they are the ones who are the focal point. Yes, acting is art with regards to how the actors must “perform” so convincingly that the audience, at that moment, does
not distinguish between reality and fantasy. However, they are “performing”. The “art” of the cinema involves the behind the scenes people who take all those clips of film and merge them together so that the end product does indeed pull the audience into that chasm of portrayed realism. The cinematographers create the final effect.
“Cinematheque is the museum for a living art, not only of the past, but for the future.” That statement explains pointblank how the cinema should be regarded as art. All art can be created to show the past, can be viewed in the present, and will be viewed in the future, a frozen moment of time. However, with the cinema, another dimension is added. The art is moving and alive; you view the passage of time while you are physically stationary.
The museum is very modern in appearance, the structural walls not complying with the tradition of plum form, but rather veering in angles. It is located in the neighborhood of Bercy, and is viewed as being significant both culturally and architecturally. The museum
contains over 40,000 archives, which is one of the largest collections in the world. The purpose of the museum itself is to give insight into the art of filmmaking as a craft through screenings. Not only can a person visit the exhibitions, but the museum also provides workshops and training, as well as courses conducted by professionals of the industry. It is truly a museum to expose the practicum of the creators of this art form.
After our tour, the group was given a choice of three films to view. I chose Cyrano de Bergerac, a classic. I was familiar with the main plot of the story; however I had never seen the movie or play. I thoroughly enjoyed it. Immediately, I noticed how eloquent the actors were. The details of the poetic flow of their words were the separation between those who were honored and cherished, and those who were scoundrels and mundane. The movie was action packed with squabbles between the socially elite, the commoners, and all-out war between the
Spaniards and the French. Aside from the military-style battle at the end, these skirmishes were resolved by the display of talent through honorable contesting with swords. This seemed more expressive than resorting to fisticuffs or pulling out a gun and shooting the opponent. Of course, that choice of action would not be in good taste for this era of history. Therefore, the cinematographers were exacting in how the reaction of the individuals to resolve their conflicts were portrayed. Attention to the detail of costuming was also attentively addressed. The viewer felt as though he was being drawn back into time, as though the movie itself had been produced centuries before. The audience was allowed a peek hole into history and thus was given insight to the comprehension of that era.
The art of cinematography has masterfully flourished from its birth of using a zoetrope to the 3D movies of today. This art form owes its evolvement through the onslaughts of technology. In its infancy, the cinema was viewed. Now, the viewer is engulfed by the cinema. The merger of the viewer and cinema succumbs to the point of sumptuous involvement of the senses. The pinnacle of development for the cinematographer has most certainly not been attained. Exactly where technology leads this art form in the future is anyone’s guess.
We had finished our tour of the Museum of Natural History earlier than expected, so
after grabbing a quick bite to eat, Mme LaLonde suggested that we take in a movie.
Such a treat! However, that was not all she had planned for us. To begin with, we needed to understand how, “take one”, cinematography is deemed an art form. Then, “take two”, we would view a film.
When considering the cinema as art, most people probably think of how the actors are the artists, as they are the ones who are the focal point. Yes, acting is art with regards to how the actors must “perform” so convincingly that the audience, at that moment, does
not distinguish between reality and fantasy. However, they are “performing”. The “art” of the cinema involves the behind the scenes people who take all those clips of film and merge them together so that the end product does indeed pull the audience into that chasm of portrayed realism. The cinematographers create the final effect.
“Cinematheque is the museum for a living art, not only of the past, but for the future.” That statement explains pointblank how the cinema should be regarded as art. All art can be created to show the past, can be viewed in the present, and will be viewed in the future, a frozen moment of time. However, with the cinema, another dimension is added. The art is moving and alive; you view the passage of time while you are physically stationary.
The museum is very modern in appearance, the structural walls not complying with the tradition of plum form, but rather veering in angles. It is located in the neighborhood of Bercy, and is viewed as being significant both culturally and architecturally. The museum
contains over 40,000 archives, which is one of the largest collections in the world. The purpose of the museum itself is to give insight into the art of filmmaking as a craft through screenings. Not only can a person visit the exhibitions, but the museum also provides workshops and training, as well as courses conducted by professionals of the industry. It is truly a museum to expose the practicum of the creators of this art form.
After our tour, the group was given a choice of three films to view. I chose Cyrano de Bergerac, a classic. I was familiar with the main plot of the story; however I had never seen the movie or play. I thoroughly enjoyed it. Immediately, I noticed how eloquent the actors were. The details of the poetic flow of their words were the separation between those who were honored and cherished, and those who were scoundrels and mundane. The movie was action packed with squabbles between the socially elite, the commoners, and all-out war between the
Spaniards and the French. Aside from the military-style battle at the end, these skirmishes were resolved by the display of talent through honorable contesting with swords. This seemed more expressive than resorting to fisticuffs or pulling out a gun and shooting the opponent. Of course, that choice of action would not be in good taste for this era of history. Therefore, the cinematographers were exacting in how the reaction of the individuals to resolve their conflicts were portrayed. Attention to the detail of costuming was also attentively addressed. The viewer felt as though he was being drawn back into time, as though the movie itself had been produced centuries before. The audience was allowed a peek hole into history and thus was given insight to the comprehension of that era.
The art of cinematography has masterfully flourished from its birth of using a zoetrope to the 3D movies of today. This art form owes its evolvement through the onslaughts of technology. In its infancy, the cinema was viewed. Now, the viewer is engulfed by the cinema. The merger of the viewer and cinema succumbs to the point of sumptuous involvement of the senses. The pinnacle of development for the cinematographer has most certainly not been attained. Exactly where technology leads this art form in the future is anyone’s guess.
Giverny
Today was our final full day in Paris. Our assignment was to pick a place in which we could become inspired; soaking in the surroundings of the French environment. Since nearly all of our excursions have been within Paris itself, I decided to travel a distance outside of the city. I wanted to see firsthand what the Impressionists may have studied in which to get their
inspirations of nature.
After studying the map, I decided on making a trek to Giverny, where
Monet lived for over 40 years. Feeling a bit adventurous, I decided to take the train to Vernon, and then I rented a bike and rode the 4 miles to Giverny.
It was delightful! This gave me a wonderful chance to breathe the air, hear the birds chirping, and stop whenever I wished to take in the splendors of the sites along the way.
Once I reached Giverny, I decided to do some exploring of the garden areas which are said to be where Monet went to paint.
Monet’s gardens were outstanding. The colors of the tulips exploded in brilliance. The graceful draping of the willows beside the lake conveyed the gentleness seen in many of his paintings. I watched the water lilies floating silently on the pond, the dragonflies quickly darting overhead, their bodies reflecting neon blue and green in the sunlight. I tried to imagine seeing these landscapes through Monet’s eyes. It was beautiful, however it was too perfect. I recalled how so many of his paintings portrayed nature in its natural state. So, I decided to ride down one of the side streets away from the city, out where Monet might truly have communed with nature.
My plan to escape the routine travel of the tourist turned out to be a grand idea. I found a little country road which seemed to head
towards some rolling hills strewn with a forest. This is where I ventured. I did not have to travel far to feel alone. Many would shudder at the thought of abandoning the “civilized” world to find a secluded spot to contemplate. However, I relished the idea eagerly.
The quiet forest where I stopped seemed to surround me with comforting assurance. I listened to the wind whisper musically through the pines. Somewhere not far away, a jay called mockingly. The butterflies fluttered gaily amongst the pink and yellow wildflowers which nestled themselves in the soft green grass. The sunlight played peek-a-boo through the branches of the tall oaks and pines. I closed my eyes, absorbing in the moment.
Is this what Monet had done? Had he stood there in the sunlight, his canvas before him, and studied how the light danced on the petals of the flowers, the wings of the butterflies, the trunks of the trees? Did he listen to the call of the birds and somehow transfer that sound to his
canvas? Did he feel the brush of the wind across his face and know he had to portray its gentleness in his painting? Was he moved to paint
the realisms of what he saw because of nature, or because of the influence of culture upon nature?
The question of whether nature is what shapes culture or if culture is what shapes nature has been tossed about among many philosophers of the day. Some believe that it is man’s culture which is exemplified in nature. The environments in which we live shape our instincts and condition our reactions to the sites around us. An environment of poverty, waste, and destitution gives rise to despair
and hopelessness. To overcome these feelings of misery, man turns to artificial environments. He builds parks with picture perfect landscapes, zoos with nature’s wildlife in cages, and amusement parks with rides that will cause feelings of delight to stir within his being.
On hot summer days, man makes his pilgrimage to water parks and stands in long lines to ride the rapids on inner tubes down a metal slope. The beaches are dotted with umbrellas and towels as the mobs stretch out to soak in the sun and improve their tans, claiming rights to their area of sand. Sightseers push and shove their way to get off the tour buses to snap their pictures, and then push and shove to get back on to the inner sanctions of air conditioning. The main vacation destinations for many are the shopping malls, bars, and nightclubs. Man has created his own nature, his escape from reality.
But is this really nature? No. The pristine beauty that God gave us to appreciate is there. The problem is that man has forgotten how to see beauty in the simple things. Man needs to gasp in delight at the vibrant colors of the wildflowers, feel the tears well in his eyes at the sight of the clouds blazing hues of gold and orange as the sun rises, and listen to the sounds of quiet in the forest with only the cicadas buzzing.
Our concrete and asphalt world has caused man to lose touch with true nature. Consequently, the few times of the year that man ventures out past the traffic lights, billboards, and busy highways, he feels out of touch with reality and therefore brings the security of his artificial nature with him. He transforms the natural world into an environment he can relate to. All the while, God’s nature is there waiting to be rediscovered if man will only disconnect himself from his Smartphone and earphones, and step out of his air conditioned vehicle. Man needs to revitalize his soul not from his artificial nature, but with the natural world that God gave us.
On my way back to Paris on the train, I felt a lump rise in my throat. I felt blessed to have been able to see the beauty that man created while I was in Paris. The cathedrals, palaces, streets, foods, and museums are the testaments to the culture of France. However, I was thankful to have been able to see the beauty that God created as well. It was the same beauty that so many fought for through the ages. I
feel certain they took the time to stop and appreciate God’s masterpiece. The French artists of the past felt the connection with God and nature which led them to express that inspiration through the creativity in their art.
Au revoir Paris. Au revoir la France. Merci pour tout ce que vous avez partagé avec moi.
Today was our final full day in Paris. Our assignment was to pick a place in which we could become inspired; soaking in the surroundings of the French environment. Since nearly all of our excursions have been within Paris itself, I decided to travel a distance outside of the city. I wanted to see firsthand what the Impressionists may have studied in which to get their
inspirations of nature.
After studying the map, I decided on making a trek to Giverny, where
Monet lived for over 40 years. Feeling a bit adventurous, I decided to take the train to Vernon, and then I rented a bike and rode the 4 miles to Giverny.
It was delightful! This gave me a wonderful chance to breathe the air, hear the birds chirping, and stop whenever I wished to take in the splendors of the sites along the way.
Once I reached Giverny, I decided to do some exploring of the garden areas which are said to be where Monet went to paint.
Monet’s gardens were outstanding. The colors of the tulips exploded in brilliance. The graceful draping of the willows beside the lake conveyed the gentleness seen in many of his paintings. I watched the water lilies floating silently on the pond, the dragonflies quickly darting overhead, their bodies reflecting neon blue and green in the sunlight. I tried to imagine seeing these landscapes through Monet’s eyes. It was beautiful, however it was too perfect. I recalled how so many of his paintings portrayed nature in its natural state. So, I decided to ride down one of the side streets away from the city, out where Monet might truly have communed with nature.
My plan to escape the routine travel of the tourist turned out to be a grand idea. I found a little country road which seemed to head
towards some rolling hills strewn with a forest. This is where I ventured. I did not have to travel far to feel alone. Many would shudder at the thought of abandoning the “civilized” world to find a secluded spot to contemplate. However, I relished the idea eagerly.
The quiet forest where I stopped seemed to surround me with comforting assurance. I listened to the wind whisper musically through the pines. Somewhere not far away, a jay called mockingly. The butterflies fluttered gaily amongst the pink and yellow wildflowers which nestled themselves in the soft green grass. The sunlight played peek-a-boo through the branches of the tall oaks and pines. I closed my eyes, absorbing in the moment.
Is this what Monet had done? Had he stood there in the sunlight, his canvas before him, and studied how the light danced on the petals of the flowers, the wings of the butterflies, the trunks of the trees? Did he listen to the call of the birds and somehow transfer that sound to his
canvas? Did he feel the brush of the wind across his face and know he had to portray its gentleness in his painting? Was he moved to paint
the realisms of what he saw because of nature, or because of the influence of culture upon nature?
The question of whether nature is what shapes culture or if culture is what shapes nature has been tossed about among many philosophers of the day. Some believe that it is man’s culture which is exemplified in nature. The environments in which we live shape our instincts and condition our reactions to the sites around us. An environment of poverty, waste, and destitution gives rise to despair
and hopelessness. To overcome these feelings of misery, man turns to artificial environments. He builds parks with picture perfect landscapes, zoos with nature’s wildlife in cages, and amusement parks with rides that will cause feelings of delight to stir within his being.
On hot summer days, man makes his pilgrimage to water parks and stands in long lines to ride the rapids on inner tubes down a metal slope. The beaches are dotted with umbrellas and towels as the mobs stretch out to soak in the sun and improve their tans, claiming rights to their area of sand. Sightseers push and shove their way to get off the tour buses to snap their pictures, and then push and shove to get back on to the inner sanctions of air conditioning. The main vacation destinations for many are the shopping malls, bars, and nightclubs. Man has created his own nature, his escape from reality.
But is this really nature? No. The pristine beauty that God gave us to appreciate is there. The problem is that man has forgotten how to see beauty in the simple things. Man needs to gasp in delight at the vibrant colors of the wildflowers, feel the tears well in his eyes at the sight of the clouds blazing hues of gold and orange as the sun rises, and listen to the sounds of quiet in the forest with only the cicadas buzzing.
Our concrete and asphalt world has caused man to lose touch with true nature. Consequently, the few times of the year that man ventures out past the traffic lights, billboards, and busy highways, he feels out of touch with reality and therefore brings the security of his artificial nature with him. He transforms the natural world into an environment he can relate to. All the while, God’s nature is there waiting to be rediscovered if man will only disconnect himself from his Smartphone and earphones, and step out of his air conditioned vehicle. Man needs to revitalize his soul not from his artificial nature, but with the natural world that God gave us.
On my way back to Paris on the train, I felt a lump rise in my throat. I felt blessed to have been able to see the beauty that man created while I was in Paris. The cathedrals, palaces, streets, foods, and museums are the testaments to the culture of France. However, I was thankful to have been able to see the beauty that God created as well. It was the same beauty that so many fought for through the ages. I
feel certain they took the time to stop and appreciate God’s masterpiece. The French artists of the past felt the connection with God and nature which led them to express that inspiration through the creativity in their art.
Au revoir Paris. Au revoir la France. Merci pour tout ce que vous avez partagé avec moi.
For your delight, please view my tribute to Paris: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5XIX9abPDY&feature=plcp