Body Art and Ornamentation Essay Example for Free

Body Art and Ornamentation Essay There is no culture in which people do not, or did not paint, pierce, tattoo, reshape, or simply adorn their bodies (Schildkrout, 2001). Throughout history, body art and ornamentation has become a worldwide phenomenon and has played a key role in our lives, yet there is a social stigma which we cannot seem to rid ourselves of. It is most commonly misunderstood and misinterpreted which can be attributed to the fact that the symbolism and significance of the body art and/or ornamentation doesn’t always translate the same among the cultures. Although Western culture views body art and ornamentation as being associated with mischief and rebellion, Japanese and African cultures use it as a way of expressing spirituality as well as cultural expression. The existence of body art and ornamentation can be traced all the way back thirty thousand years or more back to when cavemen drew pictures on the cave walls. According to Kuhn Stiner (n.d.), the alteration and enhancement of one’s body originated from the Kapthurin formation in Kenya. Anthropologists even believe that body art and ornamentation was present during the Middle Pleistocene in both Eurasia and Africa. Expression and art are two factors that play a fundamental part in African culture. According to Clarke (2006), many African societies symbolically view body art and ornamentation as a special role in guiding one’s destiny and success, mediating between world of the living as well as the spiritual world, expressing community ideals, defining power and leadership, protecting and healing, and celebrating or commemorating the cycles of life, human and agricultural. African culture uses a variety of ways to display their body art and ornamentation depending on which society they live in. These ways include: incorporating shells, teeth, or claws into their clothing or jewelry, wearing colored body paint, exaggerating human features (i.e. elongation of the neck), gauging piercings in the ears and/or lip, scarification, and tattooing. Looking from another culture’s perspective, the various forms of African body art and ornamentation are seen as being weird, out of the ordinary, and we don’t understand the importance they hold within these African cultures. On the other hand, there are other cultures such as the Japanese, who instead of outwardly portraying their body art and ornamentation will instead conceal it so it won’t be visible at all. The first signs of body art and ornamentation which appear in the Japanese culture were first noted as originating all the way back to AD 297 (Rapp, 2010). Back then, tattoos would signify which occupational group certain men belonged to and men, both young and old, would get tattoos all over their bodies including their faces. Men would even go as far as getting full body tattoos which could be found on laborers, firemen, and gangsters (Hopkins-Tanne, 2000). The Chinese considered all Japanese tattoos an act of barbarism and was perceived as being extremely negative. The body art and ornamentation that exists and has existed within the Japanese culture spreads beyond just tattooing and there are a few other methods that they used. First, many married Japanese women or courtesan in the 10th through 19th centuries would apply a paste to their teeth which would blacken them (Schildkrout, 2001). This was considered as being beautiful as well as sexually appealing to where as we would vi ew that as abnormal and ugly. Secondly, they would bind the women’s feet in order to make them smaller and the process was extremely excruciating, but again, it was considered as being beautiful. The pain that was felt and the blood that was shed served as an offering to the gods, ancestors, and spirits (2001). On the other end of the spectrum, culture within the United States has a split view regarding body art and ornamentation. In the United States, forms of body art and ornamentation can include: tattoos, piercings, branding, corseting, scarification, gauging the earlobe, make-up, plastic surgery, and dental implants (Schwarz, 2006). We live in a society where we idolize and preach the importance of physical attractiveness. In doing so, there is the separation of individuals into five different groups that exist within the social structure. The five groups include: the conformist group, the innovators, ritualists, retreatists, and the rebellion group (Rapp, 2010). The conformist group consists of individuals who understand and accept the emphasis on the beauty of the body in its natural state and the only type of body art or ornamentation that’s used is superficial . On the other hand, the individuals who are classified as innovators accept the whole concept of the beauty of the natural body, but go to the extremes to achieve this. The individuals who refuse to conform to what society has deemed as beautiful yet maintains a natural body and stays within certain bounds regarding body art and ornamentation. Retreatists include individuals who don’t abide by the guidelines of proper hygiene as well as body art and ornamentation and won’t acknowledge the beauty of the natural body. Lastly, there are individuals who are set out to change the social structure and bring about a new phase of body art and ornamentation and they make up the rebellion group (2010). Nowadays, in American culture we see body art and ornamentation, such as tattoos and piercings, as being acceptable as well as fashionable. It’s not uncommon to see people have a variety of body art, ornamentation, and body modification performed. The majority of people go and get tattoos when they experience a pivotal point in their lives as well as trying to create a sense of identity for themselves. Everyone tries to be original in their own way, but the end result is the creation and growth of conformity. By this, I mean that everyone is going out and getting tattoos, piercings, or plastic surgery and they’re trying to be â€Å"original†, but when all is said and done, they begin to blend in with one another. No matter what people say or do, a stigma has remained attached to all the various kinds of body art and ornamentation. According to Schwarz (2006), tattoos continue to not be entirely accepted and are a barrier to the economic success which is central to the â€Å"American dream†. For example, most employers have rules for their employees stating that they cannot have any visible tattoos and/or piercings that are visible to the public. This could be partly because there are individuals that could be offended and businesses could suffer from a loss of customers and sales. In the American culture, tattoos are not acceptable in a number of situations esp ecially when it has to do with the general public (2006). The highest percentage of the American culture that has body art and ornamentation can be found in the younger generations. Many teens go through a period in their lives where they feel the need to rebel against the social norm especially to spite their parents. Their choices of body art and ornamentation are indicative of their attitudes and values (Crapo, 2013). Attitudes are statements of one’s preferences while values are what we consider good or bad (2013). This plays into why certain individuals look down upon body art and ornamentation and end up enforcing the negative stigma. In conclusion, the implementation of body art and ornamentation is a designated way of indicating the various cultural differences that exist within cultures worldwide. The main reason there has been the rise in the popularity of body art and ornamentation is a result of cultural commercialism. Despite how hard we try to eliminate the soci al stigma of body art and ornamentation, it will never completely be gone. Unfortunately, we can’t have everyone’s personal opinion be the same as one another, but there is one thing that we can do. We can make the effort to educate the various cultures on one another so that we are able to comprehend the vocabulary that is used, the meaning of symbols, myths and legends, and social values. People in different cultures continue focusing on the negative aspects of body art and ornamentation, but if we were able to understand one another, the idea of peace on earth isn’t that far out of reach. References Clarke, C. (2006). The art of africa: A response for educators. The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Retrieved from Ebscohost database Crapo, R.H. (2013). Cultural anthropology. San Diego, CA: Bridgepoint Education Hopkins-Tanne, J. (2000). Body art: Marks of identity. British Medical Journal. doi: 320(7226):64 Kappeler, P., Stahl, J., Wohlrab, S. (2006). Modifying the body: Motivations for getting tattooed and pierced. Science Direct: Body Image 4, 87-95. Retrieved from http://www.sociodep.hku.hk/bbf/BBF%20Readings%20W12/W12%20Modifying_the_Body.pdf Kuhn, S.L. Stiner, M.C. (n.d.) Body ornamentation as information technology: Towards an understanding of the significance of early beads. Retrieved from http://courses.washington.edu.archyaec/archy401/readings/kuhn-beads.pdf

The Works of J.D. Salinger Essay -- Biography Bio

J.D. Salinger: The influence of an author and his writings on 1950s America The end of World War II and the beginning of the 1950s saw a time of prosperity and success in mainstream America. Less than a decade after the United States allied with Great Britain and the Soviet Union, forming one of the most powerful forces in history to defeat the axis powers in the war, the U.S. was deeply entrenched in a nuclear arms race and "Cold War" with the Soviet Union. As a result, the country put on a collective fa†¡ade of stability and strength to cover up many injustices that were taking place during the time. Americans, equipped for the first time in a long while with a good amount of money, flooded to the suburbs and replaced any sorrows they might have had with material products and consumerism -- creating an America of conformity and extravagance that Salinger would devote much of his writing to critiquing. With the publication of Catcher in the Rye in the summer of 1951, America was introduced to Holden Caulfield, a character who would continue to remain in the American psyche for over half a century. Holden was the voice of this young generation who did not seem to have the same conformist attitudes or mainstream goals as their parents. Predictably, this critique of society and questioning of traditional American values was quickly met with an attempt to censor the message of dissent. Beginning in 1954 and continuing for decades, Catcher was criticized for its cynical tone, its "un-American" content, and its foul language ("237 goddams, 58 bastards, 31 Chrissakes, and 1 fart," according to one complaint" Steinle 3). But despite this controversy, and no doubt at least partially because of it, countless numbers of Americans read ... ...es H. "Incommunicability in Salinger's The Catcher in the Rye." Western Humanities Review, XI (Spring 1957), 188-190. (Reprinted in Studies in J.D. Salinger by Marvin Laser and Norman Fruman). Lomanzoff, Eric. "The Praises and Criticisms of J.D. Salinger's The Catcher in the Rye" (1996) www.levity.com/corduroy/salinger1.htm Pinsker, Sanford. "The Catcher in the Rye and All: Is the Age of Formative Books Over?" The Georgia Review 50: 4 (1986): 953-967. Salinger, J.D. The Catcher in the Rye. New York: Little, Brown and Company, 1951. Salinger, J.D. Nine Stories. New York: Little, Brown and Company, 1953. Steed, J.P. The Catcher in the Rye: New Essays. New York: Peter Lang Publishing Inc., 2002. Steinle, Pamela Hunt. In Cold Fear: The Catcher in the Rye Censorship Controversies and Postwar American Character. Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 2000.

CSS Virginia (USS Merrimack) in the Civil War

CSS Virginia was the first ironclad warship constructed by the Confederate States Navy during  Civil War (1861-1865). Following the outbreak of the conflict in April 1861, the US Navy found that one of its largest facilities, the Norfolk (Gosport) Navy Yard, was now behind enemy lines. While attempts were made to remove as many ships and as much material as possible, circumstances prevented the yards commander, Commodore Charles Stuart McCauley, from saving everything. As Union forces began to evacuate, the decision was made to burn the yard and destroy the remaining ships. USS Merrimack Among the ships burned or scuttled were the ships-of-the-line USS Pennsylvania (120 guns), USS Delaware (74), and USS Columbus (90), the frigates USS United States (44 ), USS Raritan (50), and USS Columbia (50), as well as several sloops-of-war and smaller vessels. One of the most modern vessels that was lost was the relatively new steam frigate USS Merrimack (40 guns). Commissioned in 1856, Merrimack had served as flagship of the Pacific Squadron for three years before arriving at Norfolk in 1860. Attempts were made to remove Merrimack before the Confederates captured the yard. While Chief Engineer Benjamin F. Isherwood succeeded in getting the frigates boilers lit, efforts had to be abandoned when it was found that the Confederates had blocked the channel between Craney Island and Sewells Point. With no other option remaining, the ship was burned on April 20. Taking possession of the yard, Confederate officials later examined the wreck of Merrimack and found that it had only burned to the waterline and most of its machinery remained intact. Origins With the Union blockade of the Confederacy tightening, Confederate Secretary of the Navy Stephen Mallory began searching for ways in which his small force could challenge the enemy. One avenue that he elected to investigate was the development of ironclad, armored warships. The first of these, the French La Gloire (44) and British HMS Warrior (40 guns), had appeared in the last year and built upon lessons learned with armored floating batteries during the Crimean War (1853-1856). Consulting John M. Brooke, John L. Porter, and William P. Williamson, Mallory began pushing the ironclad program forward but found that the South lacked the industrial capacity to build the needed steam engines in a timely manner. Upon learning this, Williamson suggested using the engines and remains of the former Merrimack. Porter soon submitted revised plans to Mallory that based the new ship around Merrimacks power plant. CSS Virginia - Specifications: Nation: Confederate States of AmericaType: IroncladShipyard: Norfolk (Gosport) Navy YardOrdered: July 11, 1861Completed: March 7, 1862Commissioned: February 17, 1862Fate: Burned, May 11, 1862Displacement: 4,100 tonsLength: 275 ft.Beam: 51 ft.Draft: 21 ft.Speed: 5-6 knotsComplement: 320 menArmament: 2 Ãâ€" 7-in. Brooke rifles, 2 Ãâ€" 6.4-in. Brooke rifles, 6 Ãâ€" 9-in. Dahlgren smoothbores, 2 Ãâ€" 12-pdr howitzers Design Construction Approved on July 11, 1861, work soon began at Norfolk on CSS Virginia under the guidance of Brooke and Porter. Moving from preliminary sketches to advanced plans, both men envisioned the new ship as a casemate ironclad. Workers soon cut down the burned timbers of Merrimack to below the waterline and commenced construction of a new deck and the armored casemate. For protection, Virginias casemate was built of layers of oak and pine to a two-foot thickness before being covered by four inches of iron plate. Brooke and Porter designed the ships casemate to have angled sides to aid in deflecting enemy shot. The ship possessed a mixed armament consisting of two 7-in. Brooke rifles, two 6.4-in. Brooke rifles, six 9-in. Dahlgren smoothbores, as well as two 12-pdr howitzers. While the bulk of the guns were mounted in the ships broadside, the two 7-in. Brooke rifles were mounted on pivots at the bow and stern and could traverse to fire from multiple gun ports. In creating the ship, the designers concluded that its guns would be unable to penetrate the armor of another ironclad. As a result, they had Virginia fitted with a large ram on the bow. Battle of Hampton Roads Work on CSS Virginia progressed in early 1862, and its executive officer, Lieutenant Catesby ap Roger Jones, oversaw fitting out the ship. Though construction was ongoing, Virginia was commissioned on February 17 with Flag Officer Franklin Buchanan in command. Eager to test the new ironclad, Buchanan sailed on March 8 to attack Union warships in Hampton Roads despite the fact that workmen were still on board. The tenders CSS Raleigh (1) and Beaufort (1) accompanied Buchanan. Though a formidable vessel, Virginias size and balky engines made it difficult to maneuver and complete circle required a mile of space and forty-five minutes. Steaming down the Elizabeth River, Virginia found five warships of the North Atlantic Blockading Squadron anchored in Hampton Roads near the protective guns of Fortress Monroe. Joined by three gunboats from the James River Squadron, Buchanan singled out the sloop of war USS Cumberland (24) and charged forward. Though initially unsure what to make of the strange new ship, Union sailors aboard the frigate USS Congress (44) opened fire as Virginia passed. Rapid Success Returning fire, Buchanans guns inflicted significant damage on Congress. Engaging Cumberland, Virginia pounded the wooden ship as the Union shells bounced off its armor. After crossing Cumberlands bow and raking it with fire, Buchanan rammed it in an effort to save gunpowder. Piercing the Union ships side, part of Virginias ram detached as it was withdrawn. With Cumberland sinking, Virginia turned its attention to Congress which had grounded in an attempt to close with the Confederate ironclad. Engaging the frigate from a distance, Buchanan compelled it to strike its colors after an hour of fighting. Ordering his tenders forward to receive the ships surrender, Buchanan was angered when Union troops ashore, not understanding the situation, opened fire. Returning fire from Virginias deck with a carbine, he was wounded in the thigh by a Union bullet. In retaliation, Buchanan ordered Congress be shelled with incendiary hot shot. Catching on fire, Congress burned throughout the rest of the day exploded that night. Pressing his attack, Buchanan attempted to move against the steam frigate USS Minnesota (50), but was unable to inflict any damage as the Union ship fled into shallow water and ran aground. Meeting USS Monitor Withdrawing due to darkness, Virginia had won a stunning victory, but had taken damage amounting to two guns disabled, its ram lost, several armored plates damaged, and its smoke stack riddled. As temporary repairs were made during the night, command devolved to Jones. In Hampton Roads, the situation of the Union fleet improved dramatically that night with the arrival of the new turret ironclad USS Monitor from New York. Taking a defensive position to protect Minnesota and the frigate USS St. Lawrence (44), the ironclad awaited Virginias return. Steaming back to Hampton Roads in the morning, Jones anticipated an easy victory and initially ignored the strange-looking Monitor. Moving to engage, the two ships soon opened the first battle between ironclad warships. Pounding each other for over four hours, neither was able to inflict significant damage on the other. Though the Union ships heavier guns were able to crack Virginias armor, the Confederates scored a hit on their adversarys pilot house temporarily blinding Monitors captain, Lieutenant John L. Worden. Taking command, Lieutenant Samuel D. Greene drew the ship away, leading Jones to believe that he had won. Unable to reach Minnesota, and with his ship damaged, Jones began moving towards Norfolk. At this time, Monitor returned to the fight. Seeing Virginia retreating and with orders to protect Minnesota, Greene elected not to pursue. Later Career Following the Battle of Hampton Roads, Virginia made several attempts to lure Monitor into battle. These failed as the Union ship was under strict orders not to engage as its presence alone ensured that the blockade remained in place. Serving with the James River Squadron, Virginia faced a crisis with Norfolk fell to Union troops on May 10. Due to its deep draft, the ship could not move up the James River to safety. When efforts to lighten the ship failed to significantly reduce its draft, the decision was made to destroy it to prevent capture. Stripped of its guns, Virginia was set on fire off Craney Island early on May 11. The ship exploded when the flames reached its magazines.