Modern chic versus Romantic country

For my paper I’ve chosen to analyze two different interiors because I’m an interior design major. The two examples I’ve selected were designed by two completely different designers; Mary Emmerling and Candice Olsen. Their interiors will be great to compare and contrast because both designers have completely different design philosophies and styles. I have a great sense of respect for both of the designers and hope to someday be able to create such masterpieces. Candice Olsen’s style is modern and luxurious (Olsen, 2006), while Mary Emmerling is a bonafied country gal who loves romantic country interiors (Emmerling, 2004).

Design Analysis

The two spaces I’ve selected are both living rooms and I thought it would be interesting to compare them. Candice Olsen’s living room is very modern and sophisticated. It appears her interior is suitable for a more urban dwelling. Olsen’s design is relaxing and would tempt one to grab a cup of tea, book, and curl up on the luscious couch to read. Mary Emmerling’s living room is a romantic country retreat. It seems like this is a room one would discover in an old farmhouse, complete with a freshly baked pie cooling in the windowsill.

Candice Olsen’s Interior

Personal

My reaction to this photograph is definitely a strong one. I believe the interior is truly beautiful and Candice Olsen has done an outstanding job. The room has a strong feeling of sophistication and class. Olsen used a warm rich color palette of reds, deep browns, and golds. These colors are relaxing and welcoming. She upholstered the couch in a lavish gold fabric that is alluring and extremely inviting. The plush pattern of the armchair adds texture to the space. The chandelier creates a nice ambiance in the interior and adds a nice finishing touch.

Historical

We can easily see that this living room interior was created in the present day because of the furniture, color palette, and fixtures. The furniture is extremely modern, and could not be found 50 years ago. The wall colors and gold screen help viewers easily distinguish that this is a modern day space

Technical

The lighting used for this picture was a mixture of natural light and key light. From the right hand side of the shot there is a strong presence of light and this creates a fast fall off. I’m assuming that this is coming from a window. The chandelier and lamp set off an ambient glow creating attached and cast shadows on the walls and floor. The picture was shot at an angle so that the couch is the main focal point in the picture, this makes everything else softly fade into the background.

Ethical

I would think the ethical view of this interior space would be someone of complexity and class. This space is not one that we would see in a cabin in the woods. I believe that this is an urban dwelling that would belong to a couple who is educated and possibly without children. I draw this conclusion because it is hard to imagine kids in this beautiful and elegant space.

Cultural

I think this living room was designed for people who are fond of the lush modern style. The living room is elegant and appears the owners like to entertain, because of the rich use of textiles that upholster the couch and chair. The space was designed with the wow factor in mind. Visitors are supposed to be impressed when they enter this space, and this is exactly what it will do. The interior clearly shows it belongs to a classier person who appreciates the more luxury things in life, and wants a claming sanctuary after a long days work.

Critical

I think this room was created for a person who is career oriented, and a corporate powerhouse because of the materials Olsen has selected. Her rich textiles, warm colors, and modern lighting show that this space is meant to impress visitors. The owner can relax and get away in this space; as well and see that they are completely surrounded my extravagant pieces.

Mary Emmerling’s Interior

Personal

Mary Emmerling’s living room is whimsical, light and airy. I can picture this setting in a French country house somewhere nestled beneath rolling hills of alfalfa hay. Emmerling enjoys designing using antiques in her designs, so this space really feels broken in, and creates a very welcoming and old world atmosphere. If one was to come home to this retreat everyday, it would be the perfect end to a long stressful workday. The lighting makes the room sparkle and it really sets it off. The natural light that pours into the space really makes it come alive. The warm colors on the walls are calming and relaxing. This is a very romantic room that will dazzle anyone who enters it.

Historical

The space is a little trickier to identify when exactly it was created. We know it was a twenty-first century creation, because the designer, Mary Emmerling, is currently designing. But, the space appears to be from a French country farmhouse at the first glance. The old pine table that is set against the sofa is the first detail I noticed when I thought of French country. The others signifiers are the old pieces found throughout the room. There are antique side tables, chairs, and even a reclaimed mantel. The accessories also appear to be from the old world. Most of the pieces are antiques and because of this it would be really hard for anyone to look at this room, not knowing who designed it or when, and tell what era it came from.

Technical

Light is the main focal point in this space. It is evident that the lighting really makes this room sparkle. It is a conglomerate of natural light, and artificial light. The main light source is coming from the window and we can see this because of the intensity of white that is protruding into the room. The chandelier sets off the diffused light. The sconces also act as diffused lighting in this interior. There are cast shadows that can be spotted throughout the living room. There is a fast fall off because of the natural light pouring in through the open window. The picture was taken at a long shot so the viewer can see as many of the pieces and accessories the picture would allow.

Ethical

The ethical view of this space would be someone of a more country background. Although, the space is very rich and elegant in aesthetics, the room does not display pomp or frills, unlike the Candice Olsen interior. This living room is not as snooty, it is more inviting. It appears to be a place that people can really relax, and be themselves.

Cultural

I think the cultural view for this space would be someone who is well educated and appreciates French country interiors. I think this space would be one that could be found in the countryside. It does not seem like it would be found in a large bustling city, but a quiet little town. The people who live in it are probably antique lovers and history buffs because the space displays so much those elements.

Critical

The critical reaction to this shot was homey and inviting, yet classy and charming. It is a very romantic space that seems very temping to replicate for my home. Everything in this space meshed so well together. Different antique pieces from different time periods were mixed together and compliment each other very well. The lighting really adds glitz and glamour to a more country-inspired living room. When looking at this picture we see the people who live in this space as kind hearted people, who like to garden and antique on their weekends.

Analysis

Both of the spaces are extremely different, and extremely beautiful. Candice Olsen’s interior is city modern, while Marry Emmerling’s interior is French country. Both of the designer’s approaches to the spaces were different. Olsen was clearly designing for a more urban retreat; while Emmerling was creating a country-inspired home to welcome all visitors. That is the main part of being a designer; one needs to be versatile. Each client will want something completely different from previous clients, so it is necessary to design according to the person and setting. The interiors are elegant and classy but in completely different ways, and also both living rooms are warm and welcoming but very separate styles and philosophies.

I find it questionable that two different news sources that cover the same story can have such different opinions.  If the the facts are all the same, then how it is so easy to spin the story a totally different way.  Until the last assignment we had I never really noticed how different two sources can be.  Which brought me to my question.  My question is, how can we really trust our news sources on who is giving correct news and who is spinning the news to make us believe something different?

I found the same article discussing “a covert nuclear reactor that was destroyed last year in Syria”.  Both websites really surprised me because of the same similarities they addressed.  I thought the two different websites would have completely separate sides of the story, but shockingly, they were both the same. 

Al Jazeera’s story: http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/CAAE4CD5-3193-4CB7-B0A9-AF0CF372D6E4.htm

CNN’s story: http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/04/24/syria.nuclear/index.html

This is the picture that was taken off of CNN.  It is a picture of Israeli soldiers on September 7, 2007, a day after the Israeli air strike.  The picture in my opinion, makes the Israeli soldiers look heroic.  Because it is a bright day outside and there is a well lite environment the men appear to be good.  They are photographed standing at the top of a mountain, and it appears they are on top of the world and watching over the country for the better good.  They are protecting against “the other”.   

The articles discuss North Korea possibly helping Syria build Nuclear reactors.  The whole operation was destroyed when it was bombed by Israel.  So this picture is almost making Israel appear to the the greater side in this battle, and making North Korea and Syria the evil other. 

I think CNN has the better coverage of the story.  Before I found both of the articles I thought there would be two totally different perspectives, and this was going to be a hard choice.  But, both sites covered the story the same.  There really were no differences in the way the story itself was told.  Only, on Al Jazeera it portrayed that America could possibly be jumping to conclusions about the parties involved, (this being North Korea) in the situation. On CNN it stated that US officials are not completely certain aboutNorth Korea’s involvement on the nuclear detonators.  I chose CNN because the article on the site went more in depth to the story. It had more evidence backing the United States and their accusations of North Korea’s involvement.  Al Jazeera’s site too, had evidence, but CNN supplied more.  Also, the picture was more interesting on the CNN website.  The picture that was posted on Al Jazeera’s site was simply a map showing where the nuclear detonator was located. 

I definitely think both CNN and Al Jazeera used “the other” while telling the story.  They both used Syria and North Korea as the other.  The two countries that were scheming behind other countries backs with nuclear weapons.  Although it is not 100 percent certain North Korea was involved, they are suspected and portrayed as “the other” also.   

For this week, my that’s questionable I’ve fond our text and I’m not really disagreeing with it, but just stating my thoughts.  Lester states, “Movie attendance has been declining slowly since World War II because of the popularity of television, the computer, and the Internet” (307).  This is so strange to me.  I know this and I understand it, but it doesn’t make sense.  Nothing is quite like a movie and seeing it for the first time on the big screen.  Every year the number of ticket sales decreases by 4%.  This is a huge drop every year and its devastating to me.  I still know many people who frequent the movies.  I think it is sad that people don’t go as often as they used to.  Television, in my opinion, is complete garbage.  It is full of reality shows and commercials.  But a movie, now that is a different story.  I just think it is incredibly sad that our society does not seem to appriciate films as much as previous generations did.  

The picture I’ve selected comes from the phenomenal legendary film, The Karate Kid.  This picture portrays the “evil other” very clearly.  When I was trying to decide which film to use, I thought this movie was perfect.  The movie follows a new kid in town, Daniel, as he faces challenges of bullies.  He is always getting beat up by the same group.  And the group all knows karate, and the poor kid doesn’t stand a chance.  Daniel learns karate from an old man named Mr. Miyagi, who is a karate expert in disguise.  The whole movie’s suspense is built up in the last fight scene where good versus evil.  White versus black. 

Personal

My personal reaction was to cheer on the underdog, Daniel.  The movie follows Daniel and shows the challenges he goes through when he is moved to a new town and doesn’t know a soul.  There is a group of rich, preppy, bullies who all take karate lessons, and take it very seriously.  Daniel gets beat up by them on numerous occasions and doesn’t know a lick of karate, so he is basically helpless.  So throughout the entire movie the viewer wants the underdog to win.  The end scene, which is the picture I’ve selected is the most suspenseful. 

Historical

The historical aspect of this movie is very 1980’s.  In fact, I don’t think movies can get much more 80’s then this one does.  The movie was filmed in 1984.  The hair styles, clothing, and cars are easily distinguishable of the 80’s.  At one part in the movie, Daniel lets his girlfriend drive his car while he sits shotgun and states, “hey it’s the 80’s!” 

Technical

The photo was taken from a long shot.  This way, the viewer can see the entire body positioning of the two competitors, the underdog (good) and bully (evil one).  The two boys appear to be ready to bust out some serious moves.  As we can see they are dressed in white and black.  The two most significant colors when distinguishing good and bad.  The lighting in the picture is done with directional lighting overhead.  We can see there is a fast fall off because it is hard to see detail in the boys faces.  The two recessed lights in the back top of the shot act as vectors bringing our eyes down to the sign that reads “All Valley Karate Championship” telling the viewers this is it, the big scene where some serious round-house kicks to the face are about to commence.  The signifier in the scene is the boys positioning of their bodies.  They are ready to fight.  The signified is Daniel, the underdog, is ready to beat down the bully (boy in black).  The same goes for the denotation and connotation.  The denotation is two boys ready to fight, the connotation is the good one (white) versus the bad one (black). 

Ethical, Cultural, Critical

The ethical standpoint of this movie is very important.  Morally, the viewer is routing for Daniel.  He has been the poor little underdog through the entire movie.  He has so much heart and worked so hard to learn karate.  So naturally the viewer wants him to win the battle.  He is the good, and the bully is the evil.  The critical view is easily decided.  First, the bad is in all black and the good in white.  And the suspense builds up through the whole movie and good versus evil. 

This week for my that’s questionable, the statement that I’ve come across I’m not questioning, but simply agreeing with.  In the text it states, “Motion picture can be shot in black and white, color, or a combination of the two.  Movies also can be tinted or colorized.  Black and white always has been associated with serious, documentary-style subjects, whereas, at first, color was thought to be a distracting attribute better used for fantasies” (Lester, 296).  I totally agree with this statement.  Whenever I think of black and white movies I think of classic movies, that did not consist of comedy, but of drama and serious events.  Today, color films seem to be a little less formal.  If a new black and white film was to come out it would appear to be a serious film, rather than a silly comedy.    

I found this picture of Time Magazine’s website, and a whole article was written about Arab women, and how they are treated less fairly then men.  I thought it was very interesting and I liked the picture they chose to put with the article.  The picture is of a group of high school girls in a classroom.

Personal

My personal reaction to this picture is quietness and boredom.  When I first viewed the shot I knew that there was complete silence in the room, even with a photographer taking the picture.  There isn’t a lot going on in the shot at first glace.  It appears that women are just sitting around doing school work…yuck.  But when I started thinking about the Arab culture more, the more the picture portrayed their society correctly.  They are all behaving and doing their school work like they have been told to do.  It seems as if they are being quiet, and don’t speak unless they are spoken to.  From what I know about the culture is that Arab women do not really have a say in things, and they do not often get to make their own choices.  Obedience is very important to Arab culture, the men tend to expect the women to do whatever they want them to do.  Also, the girls are completely covered the way they are expected to be, so obviously, there are no rebels in this crowd.  It oftens seems like there are few girls that try to rebel in the Arab culture.  The femininity in this shot really comes out because they are showing they are much less dominant then men.

Historical

The historical aspect of this photo shows that the women are dressed appropriately, completely covering themselves.  They are not misbehaving or trying to gain attention from the photographer.  Not one of the girls is even looking at the photographer.  They are keeping to themselves and doing what their culture expects them to do. 

Technical

The main light source appears to be coming from the key light, so I’m guessing it is just recessed down lighting or flurouscent lighting.  There is a fast fall off in this shot because the contrast from the black robes to the white walls is very easily seen.  The girls sitting in a row in their desk act as a vector leading our eye to the edge of the shot.  This photo is a medium shot range because we can see the girls pretty close, but at the same time, we are able to see their whole bodies.  The denotation of this shot is Eastern women sitting at desks doing work, and the connotation is Arab women properly behaving and doing exactly as they are told, just as their society expects them to do. 

Ethical, Cultural, and Critical

The ethical view is that the women are completely covered up and staying true to their moral beliefs, or the expectations of their society.  The girls are not asking for attention, but being very modest and quiet.  The cultural aspect is that the women are all completely covered up.  This is a big deal in the Arab world.  The women must completely cover themselves from head to toes or else they are viewed in a very negative way or even disowned.  The critical reaction to this photo is that Arab women do as they are told.  In this shot it portrays the women as their culture believes they should act.  They are not allowed many rights, and expected to do as they are told.  I think this simple photo did a great job portraying the Arab Women, as they are expected to act in their culture.

In the text it states, “Photography has become the world’s most popular medium for creating visual messages in terms of actual users” (241).  I don’t fully agree with this statement.  Yes, pictures are very popular, but so are commercials.  In the 21st century commercials are huge, and it seems they are just as popular as pictures to get advertisments out.  It seems more and more as time goes by that less people read and more watch T.V.  I believe that commercials might be used just as much as pictures in terms of advertising. 

In the text it states, “A graphic design style, whether classified as free form or grid, will not last long unless a large number of designers take it up and use it in presentations that make sense to their audience” (173). 

I’ve never really thought a lot about graphic design.  But I do agree with this statement.  If someone does not use a certain design style, it will not last long, whereas if it is being used often and becomes popular, it will be around for quite some time. 

Milton Glaser, a graphic designer, states, “there’s a whole mess of very ugly things on the web.  And to some extent that’s because technicians are doing the design” (174).  This would be a good example of people using the design and keeping certain styles around longer (even though a lot of them should just disappear).