AyrtonGarciaJuradoDesma9
My endeavors as a history major place me in the scientific culture. I am a student analyzing the past and seeing how it influences the future. I am also correlating the events of the present to preceding historical factors. In addition to being a history student, I am a musician. An artist. Although this places me on the other side of the spectrum, I feel I “share a good deal of scientific feeling” (Snow).
I approach music and songwriting in a similar methodical way that I approach studying history. Introductory phases of songwriting include the determination of what specific style, instrumentation, and timbre. Similarly to the research period of historiography, this beginning step gathers information of what I will be sharing, whether that be a song or a historical article. Next comes the writing. Like scholarly references in history, one must always study other musicians for inspiration.
Here at UCLA, I do not feel “hostility or dislike” (Snow) between the two cultures, I however, occasionally, feel “a lack of understanding” (Snow). The impression I feel is that the arts are not seen as prestigious as the sciences from an intellectual standpoint. Sciences are extremely demanding, however, the arts focus their energy elsewhere. Rather than concentrating on the complex "curricula of schools and universities," (Vesna) the arts rely on the creativity of the individual. This creativity expresses an "ultimately new perception."
These two cultures work hand-in-hand. How does science progress without a creative scientific mind? The "culture in the arts, literature and science" (Graham-Rowe) are combined Technology has a long history of respect for free lance innovators" (Wilson). These innovators are the pioneers of scientific progression.
Comments
Post a Comment