All posts by bharris38@gsu.edu

An Examination In Time: ≈ 11:20pm

The present object, at its face, has a triangular shaped side, measured at 7.6 inches tall. At the height of this measurement, the object is sectioned off by a perfectly leveled horizontal indentation that yields to a pyramid shaped portion at .3 inches tall that crowns the remaining portion of the body. At the objects peak, it stands at 7.9 inches tall. The slope of the triangle shaped side is roughly 101 degrees from base to apex.

The object has 4 sides of uniform dimensions equal to the side measured above. When looking at the bottom of the object, when it is turned with it’s apex, at the top of the pyramid shape, pointing downward, we see that the base is squared. Each side of the square, at the bottom of the object, measures at 4.5 inches.  Its weight is measured at 330g.

The first component seen on this object is the indentation at what we can presume is the objects front. From 3.4 inch to 7.4 inch marks from the bottom of the object’s face is where this indentation occurs, measured at roughly .3 inches deep into the object’s front. This indentation has a black triangular shaped finish on what appears to be treated plastic. On either side of the triangle are groves following, perfectly, the original triangle shape of the object.

Directly center of this area, resting vertically, is a metal strip . It is thin with several grooves in it, and measured perfectly starting at the bottom and occurring more rapidly as we scan its features to its top. This piece is not attached to this area, rather, if we follow its origination, and maneuver the whole object so that the apex of the triangle is pointing at us, we see a rectangular shaped hole where the object’s point of origination extends from (see image l). The rectangular hole measures about a third of the indentation in the whole object, and extends about half of the indented area’s base, centered, at 3.4 inches on the slope from the base of the object.

Image ll
Image l

Enclosed around the metal strip, and made similar material, is a pitchfork shaped device with three prongs. The outer prongs of this device hug the metal piece and are thick, whereas the thinner piece, the center prong, is positioned directly atop the metal piece, so that the areas of the metal strip are not visible wherever the center prong rests. They seem to latch on to the grooves of the metal piece and the pitchfork device can be moved to the desired position on the many grooves. The metal piece, at its very top, is housed within a ridge on the indented section. When the metal piece is removed from this housing at its top it snaps forward from the front of the object and swings from one side to the next.

The final piece of the indented portion of the object is located directly underneath the metal piece. It is an additional indentation that is colored gray. It extends the same height as the metal piece but is markedly wider. The component that is most notable of this area is the printed and underlined numbers. The underlines correlate in position with the groves of the metal strip — so that the top number, 40, is underlined very closely to where the first groove of the metal strip begins, when housed in the ridge; and the next number from the top, 42, correlates with the following groove of the metal strip.

Each concurrent number appears on the opposite side of the metal strip, on the final indentation, and they are lowered so that 40 is higher and on the left side (from our perspective) of the metal piece compared with 42; while 42 is higher than and on the right side of the metal piece compared with 44. (40 and 44 are both on the left side of the metal piece).

At the bottom of the final indentation appears to be a pitchfork shaped figure enclosed in a black diamond. Underneath the diamond is the word “Wittner,” presumably the objects maker.

The object, excluding the indentation mentioned previously, appears to be made of a mahogany finish. It has several black striations from bottom to top and it resembles a wooden finish. This finish reveals itself to be a hard plastic by its smooth surface when touched and inspected further. On the the object’s left side, if we presume the indented area is the front, there is a metal knob that makes a click noise when turned, and the noise resonates from the interior of the object, in an area that, to be inspected, would require dismantling the entire object to view the mechanism causing the clicking noise. This knob, presumably, winds up the thin metal piece in the indentation, and when it is wound, it powers the metal strip’s swings, and provides force for the strip to oscillate at different rates, depending on the position of the pitchfork shaped device on the ridges on the metal piece.

The higher the pitchfork shaped device is on the metal strip, the slower it operates — so that 208, the number lowest on the final indentation, swings the metal strip faster than 40, the number highest on the final indentation. Whenever the metal strip crosses the center, where it is housed, it makes the clicking noise described earlier. These clicks can be timed, when maneuvering the pitchfork device, enclosing the thin metal piece in the indentation, downward or upward, and synchronized with the second hand of a clock — or faster and slower.

The final piece we will inspect is the “Wittner” inscription on the final indention, underneath the black diamond shape that houses the pitchfork shape (not to be confused with the pitchfork shaped device that encloses a portion of the metal strip). A quick internet search of the inscription coupled with the object’s description yields promising results. Wittner is a German manufacturing company that specializes in various musical auxiliary equipment. Filtering through the items in which our object is not, in its aspects of shape, size, and color, we find that our object is a Wittner made metronome Model No. 812 K, plastic casing (see image ll).

image ll
image ll

This object is not specific to the maker Wittner. Johann Maelzel is one of the early, and questionable, inventors of the modern metronome, but the design of early model components are accredited to Galileo, who first discovered the practical uses modern clock mechanisms.

Maelzel’s professional history is intertwined with Beethoven’s composition of the “Wellington’s Victory,” a composition that Maelzel commissioned the pianist to write and that was eventually performed on another contraption of the inventor’s, the panharmonicon. But after a bitter battle with the composer over legal ownership of the “Wellington’s Victory,” Maelzel, while on a world tour, died aboard the Otis en route to Philadelphia from Havana — but his contribution lasted.

Despite Maelzel’s German lineage, the term metronome actually comes from Greek. It is a combination of the words metron (measure) and nomos (relegating). Whether the ancient Greeks had any notion of developing a metronome predating Maelzel’s model is unknown, but archaeological history reveals that ancient Greece utilized various early time-keeping devices. One of these devices is called the water clock (see image lll).

image lll
image lll

Water clocks, though used by many ancient cultures, originated in Egypt around two thousand B.C. These clocks were powered by a water container, that, when emptied into a reservoir, lifted a floating device attached to handle. This handle, attached to a gear directly above it, rose as water filled the reservoir and turned the gear which controlled the movement of a clock dial that made up much of the device’s face. When the water in the supply container ran empty, and the reservoir was filled, the clock stopped and both devices would have to be restored in situ; that is, the container must be refilled, and the reservoir must be emptied . This design required constant manipulation by the ancient Greeks to keep the clocks running, but the goal, if kept, would provide an accurate measure of time elapsed. For this purpose, the water clocks calculated time more precisely than the obelisk, which ancient cultures used with ubiquity, largely due to obelisks’ functioning relegated to daylight hours — they relied on casting shadows determined by the sun’s position in the sky.

The intricate taxonomy of early Greek and ancient Egyptian water clocks begot innovation in the centuries following that led to the invention of the clock, as they are today, and other peripheral chronometrical inventions such as the Wittner metronome Model No. 812 K, plastic casing.

This particular metronome assisted in the composition process of an alto saxophone and piano piece that won first prize at the 2011 Ohio Federation of Music Clubs’ Composition Competition collegiate level. The young man who won the competition began playing the piano at thirteen years of age. During his artistic infancy, he practiced fourteen hours a day, measuring his notes and discerning the distinct taste the staccato and legato flavor a piece of music. His daily schedule deferred to his practice schedule and he committed to the precedent routine with brief rests throughout the day, the naps supplementing the lack of major REM sleep. This schedule would change depending on what time his bus would carry him to his middle and, later, high school classes. He initially learned pieces of music by ear, playing crude renditions of Handel and fumbling through advanced chord progressions of Thelonious Monk.

He exhibited a singular interest in classical and jazz music that distinguished him from his peers. His appetite for the thrill of practicing, however raw, lead him to pursue a richer knowledge of the artistry of composition and arrangement. At fifteen years old, he studied under his first piano instructor who would refine his artistic capabilities. On Tuesdays and Thursdays, at seven o’clock, he would meet with his instructor to develop his ability to read measures of sheet music. Immediately, the instructor was captivated by the student’s quick knowledge and measured understanding of the classics.

He was advised, after a brief stint into his guided direction, by the instructor to seek a more advanced teacher. That year, during his first semester of tenth grade, he heeded his former instructor’s advice and he went on to study under a master class pianist who, over the progression of her advisement, would suffer bouts of disorientation and forgetfulness that accompanied dementia that she suffered in her aged years. Nevertheless, the relationship was a fruitful one and the student decided to attend Shorter University in Rome, Georgia (the city’s name commemorates the Italian city with the same name) in remote appreciation of Italian composer, Antonio Vivaldi.

The student performed well under the tuition of his professors at Shorter, and he graduated three years after he first entered the program. He amassed a comprehensive repertoire with works ranging from early classical to later twentieth century, and many of his own compositions (some of which he entered into competition and won). He then went on to pursue his master’s degree at Cincinnati Conservatory of Music after studying in Austria, the “capital of classical music,” where he learned that composition better suited his interest. There, in his second and final year at CCM, he wrote the piece that would win him the 2011 Ohio Federation of Music Clubs’ Composition Competition collegiate level, and placed him in an excellent position to pursue his DMA at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York, and after his sojourn in this city (named after Odysseus’s refuge in Homer’s Odyssey) there is no way of knowing what direction his musical journey will take him.

The Wittner metronome, Model No. 812 K, plastic casing, accompanied the student in much of his journey, from Rome, Georgia, to Austria; from Cincinnati to Ithaca; and It was used to aide in the preparation of many pieces before garnering the mentioned win. Prior to its current ownership, it was shipped from Allgäu, Germany, according to Wittner’s shipping address.

If this metronome will ever be encased in glass, like Beethoven’s famed metronome from his landmarked house in Baden, Austria, (see map below) is too early to deduct; but there are millions of metronomes, many similar to Model No. 812 K, plastic casing, in use today measuring the practice of aspiring, and accomplished, musicians that may be curated to exhibits such as Beethoven’s .

The Model No. 812 K, plastic casing, may very well be an anachronism with the most recent metronomic devices being digital and found online. They range from traditionally standard (40 to 208 beats per minute [bpm]) to technologically advanced digital interfaces that measure time at 900bpm.

Various measures of time are useful to what flavor of music is being created. The 72bpm in “Kaneda’s Death, Pt.2 (Adagio in D minor)” from the 2007 science fiction film Sunshine, is unique from the 140bpm in Beyonce’s “Drunk in Love,” which, in turn, is unique from the faster 380bpm, at its peak, in John Coltrane’s “Giant steps.” The difference in tempo can be culture and genre specific and may provide abstract insight on the culture attributed to them (high energy 1970s disco tracks tend to have faster tempos than the religiously rigid 17th century baroque pieces).

The metronome simply measures time and a key component of many traditional metronomes is the pendulum. The pendulum on a metronome is a thin, oscillating piece that emits a clicking noise as it crosses the center line of the object. (This pendulum was described earlier in our model as the thin metal piece). Galileo Galilei developed this piece in the early 17th century, but its full functionality came later that century with the invention of the pendulum clock by Christiaan Huygens. Galileo played a major role in scientific revolution during the European Renaissance, a movement that was concerned with ordering the nature.

The clock maintains its basic function, as it has since prehistoric Egypt, with their invention of the obelisk, and that function is to track time.

Although the ancient obelisks were designed to designate the most adequate and productive farming time for the early Egyptians, through the objects’ shadow casting under sunlight, our present mode of life is not disparate from the early Egyptian’s ideas of adhering to the order, or rather, the ordering, of time.

The Model No. 812 K, plastic casing, and its analogues, function reveals the nature of music; and that is, music is a sequence of sounds moving through time. Differences in pattern are in music that reflect the performer or writer or the overarching cultural notions that make up any particular piece, but the principal objective is to utilize the time. Like the ancient Egyptians whose timepiece tracked the growth of their crops, or the pianist that practiced fourteen hours a day to improve his skill, society’s daily occurrences are measured progression, or stagnation, through time — the Egyptian farmland is either tilled or not, but time continues to move.

giphy

We are able to order ourselves with time. From limitations in statutes and time stipulations in international treaties, to the more commonplace and, oftentimes, fleeting occurrences in our world, such as the aging of the piano instructor, our lives revolve around the passage of time. We can, in that time, become pianist, inventors, or farmers — or an innumerable host of desirable persons driven by a range of motivations.

This notion of employing the passage of time to optimize human utility, chronicled earlier with the student pianist and the metronome, and that humans are governed by time, the Egyptians and their crops, is condensed, at its essence, in the functionality of the metronome (that the object measures timing to aide in the production of the most suitable composition for its composer) yet the piece must remain in accordance with the parameters of time. The character’s mentioned (the Egyptians, the Greek, the disco music, the baroque music, Beethoven, Maelzel, the student, and his two instructors) all adhered to time, whether or not they were aware, to produce an output — or reap the consequences of it — some more socially and culturally impactful than others. Nevertheless, they were able to impact in some way or another and are comparable to the pieces of music, at their embryonic stage, measured by the metronome, and by time in general, in that it is an laborious task to compose a product worthy to be called symphonic if time is not administered properly, and with the desired flavor, yet something must be created lest time be wasted.

It is an elusive, garbled, and all inclusive concept with many components all seeming to compound upon the whole, repeat what has occurred,  and connect dissimilar units.

Blog Post 10: Essay as exposition

In James Baldwin’s The Fire Next Time, he speaks about the condition of African Americans in the 1950-60s and much of the injustices they faced. The book is split into two essays. The first, “My Dungeon Shook,” is an epistle to his young nephew addressing the issues the author projects the boy to encounter being born in an era of civil strife. The second essay, “Down At The Cross,” details personal memories of the author’s life — from locally popular youth minister to a leading voice in the civil rights movement — and provides reflective insight to issues he’d faced. The book does not offer numbered facts nor does it urge its readers to view the civil rights era in any particular view. It is written as a personal, and sometimes emotional, account of the author’s life and explores areas in society that he perceives fault.

The author and his nephew
The author and his nephew

Fire Next Time is one of many examples of expository writing. That is, in this case, it collects experiential data and orders it to the culturally dominant mode of thinking, then it attempts to reason why the culturally dominant mode of thinking as such. Expository writing is a rhetorical mode concerned with informing its audience about a subject it covers. It is different from persuasive writing, though it can be persuasive, in that it is not attempting to convince its readers to believe in an argument the writer posits; rather, it encourages the readers to develop their own ideas based on the information presented. In many passages of “Down At The Cross” Baldwin asserts the misgivings of his younger self and reveals his later apprehensions to position himself within the circles of formidable civil rights leaders. He details his diverging opinions with many of his contemporaries in achieving racial and civil equality, yet he doesn’t charge them for seeking a disparate ultimate goal. Expository writing, in Baldwin’s case, utilizes personal views on the immediate world to address areas that need improvement.

I bought the book several years ago to explore a different voice of the sixties. I wasn’t necessary concerned about the content of the book, but I did want to read Baldwin’s exercise in explaining scenarios of oppression and the ways he elucidated these injustices differently from more common voices. I went on forums and relied on user ratings before I stumbled on a contemporary review touting the author’s essays as two of the most influential of its era. The book itself may represent an artifact of material culture in that it represents much of the thinking of it’s time. The civil rights movement sought to combat discontent with the present state of the nation and much of it had to do with injustices of the past. And similar to this notion, Baldwin, in his book, expresses those same feelings of discontent, while exploring how his younger self influenced the person he grew to be. Material culture analysis is concerned with forming thorough inferences about a culture through the the items they used. In this case, Baldwin’s work was a critical success, and with this accolade, we can assume that he was able to speak on behalf of many in his generation.

Exploring Measures

The present object, at its face, has a triangular shaped side, measured at 7.6 inches tall. At the height of this measurement, the object is sectioned off by a perfectly leveled horizontal line to form a pyramid shaped portion at .3 inches tall. At the objects peak, it stands at 7.9 inches tall.

The object has 4 sides of uniform dimensions. When looking at the bottom of the object, when it is turned with it’s apex, at the pyramid shape, pointing downward, we see that the base is square shaped. Each side of the square, at the bottom of the object, measures at 4.5 inches. The slope of the triangle is roughly 101 degrees from base to apex. Its weight is measured at 330g.

The first component seen on this object is the indentation at what we can presume is the objects front. From 3.4 inches to 7.4 inches is where this indentation occurs, measured at roughly .3 inches deep into the object’s front. This indentation has a black triangular shaped finish on what appears to be treated plastic. On either side of the triangle there are groves following, perfectly, the original triangle shape of the object.

Directly down the center of this area is a metal piece. It is thin, with several grooves in it, measured perfectly starting at the bottom and occurring more rapidly as we scan its features to its top. This piece is not attached to this area, rather, if we follow is origination, and maneuver the whole object so that the apex of the triangle is pointing at us, we see a rectangular shaped hole where the object’s point of origination extends from. The rectangular hole measures about a third of the indentation in the whole object, and extends about half of the indented area’s base, centered, at 3.4 inches on the slope from the base of the object.

On the metal piece is a pitchfork shaped device with three prongs. The outer prongs of this device hug the metal piece and are thicker than the center prong, which is positioned directly on top of the metal piece. They seem to latch on to the grooves of the metal piece and the device can be moved to the desired position. The metal piece, at its very top, is housed within a ridge of the indented section. When the metal piece is removed from this housing it snaps forward from the front of the object and swings from side to side.

The final piece of the indented portion of the object is located directly underneath the metal piece. It is an additional indentation with a gray color. It extends the same height as the metal piece but is markedly wider. There are underlined numbers printed on this piece. The underlines correlate in position with the groves of the metal piece — so that the top number, 40, is underlined very close to where the first groove of the metal piece begins, when housed in the ridge, and the next number from the top, 42, correlates with the next groove of the metal piece.

Each concurrent number appears on the opposite side of the metal piece, on the final indentation, and lowered so that 40 is higher than 42, and on the left side (from our perspective) of the metal piece, while 42 is higher than 44, and on the right side of the metal piece (40 and 44 are both on the left side of the metal piece).

At the bottom of the final indentation appears to be a pitchfork shaped figure enclosed in a black diamond. Underneath the diamond is the word “Wittner,” presumably the objects maker.

The object, excluding the indentation mentioned previously, appears to be made of a mahogany finish. It has several black striations from bottom to top and resembles a wood finish. The finish reveals itself to be a hard plastic when touched and inspected further. On the the object’s left side, if we presume the indented area is the front, there is a metal knob that clicks on hinges in the interior of the object, in an area that, to be inspected, would require dismantling the entire object to view. This knob, presumably, winds up the metal piece in the indentation, and when it is wound, the metal piece swings at different rates, depending on the position of the pitchfork shaped device on the ridges on the metal piece.

The higher the pitchfork shaped device is, the slower it swings — so that 208, the number lowest on the final indentation, swings the metal piece faster than 40, the number highest on the final indentation. Whenever the metal piece crosses the center, where it is housed, it makes a clicking noise. These clicks can be timed, when maneuvering the pitchfork device, to match up with the second hand of a clock — or faster and slower.

The final piece we will inspect is the “Wittner” inscription on the final indention, underneath the diamond shape. A quick internet search yields some results, Wittner is a german manufacturing company that specifies in various musical auxiliary equipment. Our object turns out to be a Wittner made metronome Model No. 812 K, plastic coating.

This object is not specific to the maker Wittner. Johann Maelzel is one of the early, questionable, inventors of the modern metronome, and the design of early model components are accredited to Galileo, who discovered the practical uses of a pendulum swing.

Maelzel’s story ties in closely with Beethoven’s composition of the Battle Symphony, where Maelzel requested a piece be written to be performed on another contraption of his, the panharmonicon. But after a bitter battle with the composer over the ownership of the piece, Maelzel, while on a world tour, died aboard the Otis in travel from Havana to Philadelphia, but his contribution lasted.

Despite Maelzel’s German lineage, the term Metronome actually comes from Greek. It is a combination of the words Metron (measure) and Nomos (relegating). Whether the ancient Greeks had any notion of developing a metronome predating Maelzel’s model is unknown, but history shows them as users of water clocks.

Water clocks are early time keeping devices that originated in Egypt around two thousand B.C.. These clocks were powered by a water supply, that, when emptied into a reservoir, lifted a floating device that was attached to handle. This handle, attached to a gear above it, would rise as water filled the reservoir, and turn the gear which controlled the movement of a clock dial. When the water in the supply container ran dry, and the reservoir was filled,  the clock would stop and both devices would have to be restored to normal. This design required constant manipulation to the ancient Greeks, but with Obelisks only being readable during daylight hours, the water clock was an efficient substitute.

These water clocks of ancient Egypt and Greece begot innovation in the centuries following that led to the invention of the clock, as we know it, and the Wittner metronome Model No. 812 K, plastic coating.

This particular metronome was used during the composition of an alto saxaphone and piano piece that won first prize at the 2011 Ohio Federation of Music Clubs’ Composition Competition collegiate level. The young man who won the competition began playing the piano at thirteen years of age. During his artistic infancy, he practiced fourteen hours a day, measuring his notes and discerning the distinct taste the staccato and legato flavor a piece. His daily schedule deferred to his practice schedule and he committed to the precedent routine with short naps throughout the day supplementing the lack of major REM sleep. This schedule would change depending on what time his bus, provided by the local public school system, would carry him to his middle and high school classes. At first he learned pieces of music by ear, playing crude renditions of Handel and fumbling through advanced chord progressions for those of the likes of Thelonious Monk.

He exhibited a singular interest in classical and blues music that distinguished himself among his peers. His appetite for the thrill of practicing, however raw, lead him to pursue a richer knowledge of the artistry of composition and arrangement. At fifteen years old he got his first piano instructor who would refine his artistic capabilities. On tuesdays and thursdays, at seven o’clock, he would meet with his instructor to develop his ability to read measures of sheet music. The instructor was captivated by the student’s quick knowledge and measured understanding of the classics.

He was advised, after a short period, by the instructor to seek a more advanced instructor. That year, during his first semester of tenth grade, he heeded his former instructor’s advice and he went on to study under a master class instructor who, over the progression of her advisements, would suffer bouts of disorientation and forgetfulness that accompanied her dementia. Nevertheless, the relationship was a fruitful one and the student decided to attend Shorter University in Rome, Georgia (the city’s name commemorates the Italian city with the same name) in remote appreciation of Italian composer, Antonio Vivaldi.

The student performed well under the tuition of his professors at Shorter, and he graduated three years after he first entered the program. He amassed a comprehensive repertoire with works ranging from early classical to later twentieth century, and many of his own compositions (some of which he entered into competition and won). He then went on to pursue his master’s degree at Cincinnati Conservatory of Music after studying in Austria, the “capital of classical music,” and he’d learned on his trip that he focus should be on composition. There, in his second and final year at CCM, he wrote the piece that would win him the 2011 Ohio Federation of Music Clubs’ Composition Competition collegiate level, and placed him in an excellent position to pursue his DMA at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York, and after his sojourn in this city named after Odyssey’s refuge there is no way of knowing what direction his journey will take him.

The metronome was attendant in much of his journey, from Rome, Georgia, to Austria; from Cincinnati to Ithaca, and It was used to aide in the preparation of many pieces before garnering the mentioned win. Prior to its current ownership, it was shipped from Allgäu, Germany, Wittner’s shipping address.

If this metronome will ever be encased in glass, like Beethoven’s famed metronome, from his house in Baden, Austria, is too early to know, but there are millions of metronomes in use today measuring the practice of aspiring, and accomplished, musicians.

The most recent metronomic devices are digital and many can be used from the internet. They range from the traditionally standard (ranging from 40 to 208 beats per minute [bpm]) to the technologically advanced digital interfaces that measure time at 900bpms.

Various measures of time are useful to what flavor of music is being created. From the 72bpm in “Kaneda’s Death, Pt.2 (Adagio in D minor)” from the 2007 science fiction film Sunshine, to the 140bpms in Beyonce’s “Drunk in Love,” to the faster 380bpm, at its peak, in John Coltrane’s “Giant steps.” The disparity in tempo can be culture and genre specific and can provide abstract insight on the culture attributed to them (disco music in the 1970s usually has a faster tempo than 17th century baroque music).

The metronome simply measures time and a key component of many traditional metronomes is the pendulum. The pendulum is a thin metal piece that swings and ticks as it crosses the center line of the metronome. It was initially developed by Galileo Galilei in the early 17th century, and its full functionality came later that century with the invention of the pendulum clock by Christiaan Huygens. Galileo played a major role in scientific revolution during the European Renaissance, a movement that was concerned with ordering the nature.

The clock maintains its basic function, as it has since prehistoric Egypt, with their invention of the obelisk, and that is to track time.

Although the ancient obelisk were designed to designate time for the early egyptians to farm, our present mode of life is not disparate from their ideas of raising grain during their most productive hours. We maintain a forty-hour work week; a scheduled time in which a train arrives, or leaves; we maintain our children’s bedtime, or our own bedtime, and bedtime stories; we maintain daylight savings time, and innumerable ways to track our time. Many contracts are often carefully crafted with time limitations and stipulations. Many of our laws have statutes. We even monitor our blood pressure with time, and surgeons offer an estimated time of surgery prior to operation. Time is an aspect of life we adhere to constantly without conscious effort. We order ourselves to certain schedules and are flustered when that element of our life falls to pieces–how many times do you scour the internet or repeatedly pester your coworkers and friends to gather a definite answer to whether we fall back an hour when daylight savings ends. Time is an rigid autocrat and we marshal our abilities ingratiatingly for an opportunity to compose a symphonic catalogue of how that time was spent.

Blog #9 Wittner Metronome Description

The present object, at its face, has a triangular shaped side, measured at 7.6 inches tall. At the height of this measurement, the object is sectioned off by a perfectly leveled horizontal line to form a pyramid shaped portion at .3 inches tall. At the objects peak, it stands at 7.9 inches tall.

The object has 4 sides of uniform dimensions. When looking at the bottom of the object, when it is turned with it’s apex, at the pyramid shape, pointing downward, we see that the base is square shaped. Each side of the square, at the bottom of the object, measures at 4.5 inches. The slope of the triangle is roughly 101 degrees from base to apex. Its weight is measured at 330g.

The first component seen on this object is the indentation at what we can presume is the objects front. From 3.4 inches to 7.4 inches is where this indentation occurs, measured at roughly .3 inches deep into the object’s front. This indentation has a black triangular shaped finish on what appears to be treated plastic. On either side of the triangle there are groves following, perfectly, the original triangle shape of the object.

Directly down the center of this area is a metal piece. It is thin, with several grooves in it, measured perfectly starting at the bottom and occurring more rapidly as we scan its features to its top. This piece is not attached to this area, rather, if we follow is origination, and maneuver the whole object so that the apex of the triangle is pointing at us, we see a rectangular shaped hole where the object’s point of origination extends from. The rectangular hole measures about a third of the indentation in the whole object, and extends about half of the indented area’s base, centered, at 3.4 inches on the slope from the base of the object.

On the metal piece is a pitchfork shaped device with three prongs. The outer prongs of this device hug the metal piece and are thicker than the center prong, which is positioned directly on top of the metal piece. They seem to latch on to the grooves of the metal piece and the device can be moved to the desired position. The metal piece, at its very top, is housed within a ridge of the indented section. When the metal piece is removed from this housing it snaps forward from the front of the object and swings from side to side.

The final piece of the indented portion of the object is located directly underneath the metal piece. It is an additional indentation with a gray color. It extends the same height as the metal piece but is markedly wider. There are underlined numbers printed on this piece. The underlines correlate in position with the groves of the metal piece — so that the top number, 40, is underlined very close to where the first groove of the metal piece begins, when housed in the ridge, and the next number from the top, 42, correlates with the next groove of the metal piece.

Each concurrent number appears on the opposite side of the metal piece, on the final indentation, and lowered so that 40 is higher than 42, and on the left side (from our perspective) of the metal piece, while 42 is higher than 44, and on the right side of the metal piece (40 and 44 are both on the left side of the metal piece).

At the bottom of the final indentation appears to be a pitchfork shaped figure enclosed in a black diamond. Underneath the diamond is the word “Wittner,” presumably the objects maker.

The object, excluding the indentation mentioned previously, appears to be made of a mahogany finish. It has several black striations from bottom to top and resembles a wood finish. The finish reveals itself to be a hard plastic when touched and inspected further. On the the object’s left side, if we presume the indented area is the front, there is a metal knob that clicks on hinges in the interior of the object, in an area that, to be inspected, would require dismantling the entire object to view. This knob, presumably, winds up the metal piece in the indentation, and when it is wound, the metal piece swings at different rates, depending on the position of the pitchfork shaped device on the ridges on the metal piece.

The higher the pitchfork shaped device is, the slower it swings — so that 208, the number lowest on the final indentation, swings the metal piece faster than 40, the number highest on the final indentation. Whenever the metal piece crosses the center, where it is housed, it makes a clicking noise. These clicks can be timed, when maneuvering the pitchfork device, to match up with the second hand of a clock — or faster and slower.

The final piece we will inspect is the “Wittner” inscription on the final indention, underneath the diamond shape. A quick internet search yields some results, Wittner is a german manufacturing company that specifies in various musical auxiliary equipment. Our object turns out to be a Wittner made metronome Model No. 812 K, plastic coating.

Time And How We Tell It

My timeline spans the groundbreaking inventions in the way we tell time. My focus is on clocks and how they reflect our thinking as a civilization. There may have been some additions, like the atomic clock, built in 1949, and is the worlds most accurate clock to which all other clocks follow, that I’ve omitted; but, I don’t think entries such as this would find a comfortable place on the list because of its obscurity. I want to focus more on the everyday timepieces. From the ancient sundials in Egypt to the cell phone watches that are becoming reality, the look of the device used to track time has changed, but the motivation largely remains the same. The farmer and the business worker must adhere to their own particular schedules, whether it is the rooster call that signifies the beginning of the work day, or the rooster call alarm on the I-Phone. There is work to be done and the clock helps us manage it.  Towards the end of the timeline there are entries that are not merely clocks. The cellphone and computer have infinite, practical uses that I think vastly overshadows the utility of the entries preceding them (I can guess comfortably many kids in ancient Egypt tried scaling the obelisk). Multi-functionality with clocks and watches is another component that I want to explore further, whether it is timing for the forty-yard dash or a decorative piece above a mantle, they have different uses with the same principle.

Blog #6: Crossed Circuits

At Least We Care

In a study conducted in 2013, a team sought to find out if humans show empathy towards robots. Amar Toor’s article, “The robots are coming, but will we love them,” recaps that study. A group of people were given four videos to watch: a human coddling a robot, a human coddling another human; a human mistreating a robot, and a human mistreating another human.

Third Video. The affect is strange.

The results were that those being tested produced the same neurological patterns consistent with each similar type of scenario. That meant they empathized with the robot when it was being mistreated the same way they did with the human subject .

To what degree was the empathy similar? Who knows. But that test proved that we, or those tested, show empathy, no matter how little, towards robots. But why show any empathy at all? It seems that this is one of those psychological phenomena or neurological ticks that humans have.

“It can only be attributable to human error” – Hal 9000

I highly doubt that our empathy readings spike when Leonard from sales loses it and smashes his computer to bits (maybe we empathize for him, but for the computer, no). I think this tick has a lot to do with our ability to transpose ourselves with robots, especially the ones that resemble us, a little. If it moves like us and speaks our language, both verbal and nonverbal, then we may see ourselves in it; like some ancient hex was placed on us to where we can’t distinguish the line that separates ourselves and others like us. But that goes with almost anything that resembles us: dolls, action figures, and so on. Of course those examples may be geared toward children’s fancies, but the fact remains.

If the empathy test was done on something “smart” would we react the same? If a robot vacuum (the ones shaped like CD players) was smashed repeatedly and violently with a mallet it may not elicit similar readings as if we witnessed George Jetson bludgeon Rosie the Robot until her circuit-board was showing. The two objects perform essentially the same task: cleaning; but Rosie has humans characteristics, the robot vacuum doesn’t. I don’t think we have an option whether or not we show empathy to the former, but the latter, we’ll just buy a new one.

Closing The Gap

Although Rosie the Robot may be a automaton clear of the “uncanny valley” we wouldn’t sacrifice our dog for her.

Uncanny Valley in a single image
Uncanny Valley in a single image

While robots and androids fake human consciousness and characteristics, plants and animals actually have one, or are thought to have one, because they operate, and have been operating, without human actors. A parrot repeats just as much as we tell them to but their mimicry is different than Siri’s. A dog sits because it has background knowledge; a robotic dog, like the Poo-Chi, sits because it was programmed to react to that command.

I don’t think we feel real empathy towards robots and “smart” objects. I think it’s just our brains firing unauthorized signals to clue us in on some primordial alert that we haven’t yet evolved from. We can hold full conversations with Watson, Hal 9000, Gerty, the Iron Giant, or any other real or imagined object of human imitation, but, still, that would be like talking to  wall in an empty room.

Sources

Mufson, Beckett. “Could You Empathize With A Robot? | The Creators Project.” The Creators Project. The Creators Project, 25 July 2014. Web. 03 Oct. 2014.

Toor, Amar. “The Robots Are Coming, but Will We Love Them?” The Verge. The Verge, 26 Apr. 2013. Web. 03 Oct. 2014.

Wolchover, Natalie. “Why CGI Humans Are Creepy, and What Scientists Are Doing about It.” LiveScience. TechMedia Network, 18 Oct. 2011. Web. 03 Oct. 2014.

Blog Post #4 Detached Understanding

I think we definitely study objects more often for stories about humans who used them rather than studying objects as autonomous things. Studying them for insight about humans asks and answers more questions. It seems that dissecting an item as an independant thing answers the question of how it was used, while dissecting that same item to determine the human motive behind it can answer who made it, who used it, how they used it, and why it was used.

Lepawsky and Mather present an interesting idea, one that Deetz touched on in his book. Late in the article by Lepawsky and Mather they comment on the effort to recycle the defunct CRTs that may be completed in the year two-thousand fifty, if that is what is meant by the “waste stream”. That means if all CRTs will be used for renewable materials, then our history will be wiped of any physical evidence of them. It is hypothetical because it may be impossible to get a hold of every one of the monitors ever invented. Of course there are methods to identify these things, like pictures in Lepawsky’s and Mather’s article, and the methods Deetz describes, but if the history of objects made by humans ties into human’s own history there may be a disjoint in the narrative establishing a relationship that encompasses all the nuances in the objects.

After I read the article and prompt I started thinking about why it is that we place ourselves as the subjects in discourses under the social science umbrella and how it relates to the readings we’ve done so far. It only seems logical that we import ourselves over the objects because they are our creations. We can’t take claim for the sun and moon or processes in the brain or natural formations on the earth – did we create mathematics or just explain it? But we do have ownership over objects made by us. When we reclaim objects we have lost a story of how our ancestors reacted to the world can be discovered.

If we destroy a class of objects we are destroying the tangible story that accompanied those items. Lets say that someday the CRTs no longer exist, we can study the pictures, diagram the dimensions, read the literature, but that doesn’t seem, in my mind, to grasps the whole story. I remember watching Tyra Banks wear a padded suit in participation of a social experiment about the treatment of overweight people. She wore the suit for an afternoon going about her daily business in New York or Los Angeles, and nobody knew who she was. Attached to her suit were cameras to capture the expressions on people’s faces as they walked by or interacted with her. She ended the experiment by making remarks that she felt everyone judging her and so on. The experiment was good for social awareness, but the whole time I was watching I couldn’t help but smack my teeth about Tyra’s revelations: she will never truly know what it is like to be the weight she portrayed. It reminds me of an Oscar winning period piece about the Victorian Era, although those involved have done due diligence, I just don’t buy totally replicating that era.

I say this because there are real subtle nuances to the objects we reclaim. Yes, there are very thorough papers and accounts and books about the histories of objects but we can never capture a true understanding of what the world was like from where those objects came. So, if we recycle every last CRT (or any other item) we can lose a piece to better understanding a time we are not from and mindset we do not have. I guess that is why we have museums.

A Very Thin Line

Marovich observes that cuteness may be caused by an objects vacuity and humans’ ability to manipulate that space. It seems that what is cute can be determined by what can be controlled and has no power to act upon us. The Hello Kitty doll in Marovich’s essay is a great example of a completely innocuous object that does not hold any type of power, but can act as a vessel for the power that we give it.

On the other hand an object that is not cute, or is unsettling, is an objects that acts upon us, rather than the other way around. Noel Carroll examines what classifies things as unsettling in his paper The Nature of Horror. Although he discusses horror in film he uses academic research about horror and unsettling things to back up his claims. He states that horrific things cause emotional and physical (crawling skin) agitations. Rather than the object acting like a mirror as Marovich states about cute things, horrifying or unsettling things have properties about them that conjures beliefs within us.

But what determines cuteness seems a little more difficult to pin down than what determines horrific and unsettling things. It seems that what is cute often takes on human qualities; Hello Kitty was recently revealed to be a little girl (which I think is uncanny). Cuteness may also be attributed to the vulnerability or innocence of the object, like a newborn child. Maybe the ability of an object to act as if it has its own agency, but actually doesn’t — like the chihuahua described in Marovich essay — can also determine cuteness.

Let me return to Carroll’s essay for a bit, he identifies unsettling things as “impure and unclean.. . .putrid or mouldering things. . .from oozing places” (Carroll 54). He also states that these things, or how we think of these things, are made of dead or rotting flesh and we associate unsettling things with disease and vermin. Because we can be repulsed by it, vomit can be classified as something unsettling; but look at the differences between the videos of cats vomiting (Sorry. Gross, I know):

This at the :28 mark

as opposed to this at the :20 mark

Why is it that we can accept the first one but the second, not so much, when they are essentially doing the same thing?

At one time, my sister wanted a Volkswagen Beetle. When I asked why, she responded that it was cute. I didn’t continue the conversation but I guessed she thought it was cute because it was a comparatively small car. But this cuteness is different than, lets say, a little girl’s miniature tea set; the tea set may invoke memories of being a little girl or raising one. My sister never owned a Beetle and can’t possibly have any attachment to it like the affection towards the tea set. But she can impose her own belief, in objectifying the car, as to how she would be seen if she did drive a Beetle.

If we see a young girl playing with a tea set we may say it was cute, but what if we ran into a grown man playing, just as genuinely, with that same tea set? Would the tea set still be cute or did its association with the grown man degrade its cuteness.  Like the videos above, if those were the same cats at different ages would the second be more cute due to that relation?

Because my sister has gotten older and her taste has changed, she no longer cares for the Beetle. If I asked her if it was cute she’d probably respond with indifference; the car is neither cute or un-cute. There are a lot of psychological and sociological mechanisms to both cute and unsettling things that I can’t begin to understand.