Biography: Francisco Jose de Goya was born in Fuendetodos, Saragossa on March 30th in 1746 to Joseph and Gracia Goya-Lucientes. Goya attended Escuelas Pias, a school where he developed a close friendship with Martin Zapatar whom he promised he’d never forget. After graduating from Escuelas Pias, Francisco entered the studio of Jose Lujan, who was an Academic Painter. Goya learned a tremendous amount from Jose; he learned the elementary steps of painting among other valuable things.
Goya was a talented man. He played the guitar and was a bull fighter, where he participated in local bull fighting. After several years, Goya moved to Madrid where he studied with Mengs, a popular painter of the Royal Court. However Francisco and Mengs clashed in terms of personality and art approach therefore Goya left Mengs’ studio and went to study with another painter. Soon after that, Goya moved to Rome where he entered the studio of Francisco Bayeu. There, he learned the art of colour.
During Goya’s travels in Italy, Goya was awarded the second prize in a painting competition organized by the city of Parma in January 1771. He continued to be the pupil of Bayeu while his paintings were already becoming popular. In 1774 Goya married Bayeu’s sister, Josefa, or Pepa, as Goya affectionately called her. Goya’s marriage to Pepa introduced him to the Royal Tapestry Workshop where in five years he designed forty-two patterns for tapestry. He also painted a canvas for the Alter of the Church of San Francisco, El Grande and was appointed a member of the Academy of San Fernando.
In 1783 Goya succeeded in being appointed to paint a portrait of King Carlos II and by doing so he became fairly close with the Crown Prince Don Luis and went to live in his house. In 1792 Goya became deaf from an illness. His feelings and emotions became filled with darkness and ghostly thoughts. His character became more withdrawn and introspective while he devoted himself only to his paintings. Despite his disability, in 1799 Goya was appointed ‘Royal Painter’ and worked by Royal Order to paint the King, Queen and Royal family pictures as ell as portraits ‘Princess de la Paz’ and many other nobles. This made Goya very popular amongst other Royalty. In 1814 Goya isolated himself from everything and bought a house on the outskirts of Manzanares, which became known as the ‘House of the Deaf’. There, he drifted himself from others and painted the famous Black Pictures, a series of dark paintings. Some of the paintings which are known are The Witches Sabbath, The Reading, The Fates and Saturn Devouring His Son. In 1824 Goya left Spain only to return two years later after suffering from another illness.
His son Francisco Javier met him and took care of his father. However, despite his son’s hospitality and kindness Goya decided to return to Bordeaux, where he resided before his illness. Goya carried out his life alone, locked in a closed room. One day he received a message from his son, Javier announcing a visit. This news was very emotionally overwhelming for Goya. Due to his frail condition, the news caused him to breakdown and it unfortunately resulted in his death. Francisco Jose de Goya passed away on April 16th 1826 but his genius work still remains to inspire us.
Physical Description of Saturn Devouring His Son The painting Saturn Devouring his Son is an image of the Roman g-d Saturn, eating one of his children. The painting portrays Saturn as an insane figure with his eyes bulging out of his head and fingers pressed tightly on the back of his child, whom he is devouring and whose head has already been eaten and blood spilling out of the open flesh. The background is black which makes the light coloured limbs of Saturn and his Son to stand out, as well as the madness in Saturn’s eyes.
Goya used oil paints and perhaps real blood for an additional affect. The painting portrays an intense haunting theme and I believe it reflects Goya’s thoughts and emotions before he died. The piece Saturn Devouring His Son is a painting of a Roman g-d fearing a prophecy that one of his children would one day overthrow him which led him to devour all of his children. The expression theory by Tolstoy “holds that art communicates something in the realm of feelings and emotions” (Tolstoy 155).
This piece proves Tolstoy’s theory as Goya painted the painting a few years before his lonely death after he isolated himself from the world. The painting transmits negative, sad feelings upon looking at it, just as Goya felt while creating it. “Art conveys knowledge of how to perceive the world around us…the medium of expression in art is neither objective nor subjective. It is the matter of a new experience in which subjective and objective” (Freeland 167) are intertwined.
From this we understand that Freeland is explaining that ones art is influenced not by ones subjective view or by an objective view, but that art is both coming together into one piece if expression with both subjective and objective influencing it. Saturn Devouring His Son conveys knowledge on how Goya perceived the world at the time he painted the piece, as well as how society may have been in the 17th century. MLA Citation Ediciones . Minos, A Goya Biograophy, 1961<http://www. eeweems. com/goya/1961_prado_bio. html> The Answers Family, Francisco Goya<http://www. anwers. com/topic/franciscogoya. html>
Modification Of Piagets Conservation Tasks
Lori, who is four years old, is currently in Piaget’s preoperational stage. According to Piaget, children in this stage are unable to comprehend conservation tasks. During the preoperational stage, children are able to use mental representations, such as images, drawings, words, and gestures, to think about objects and events. Their thinking becomes faster, more flexible, efficient, and socially shared. However, their thinking is also limited by egocentrism, a focus on perceptual states, reliance on appearances rather than underlying realities, and lack of reversibility or rigidity. They do not have the ability to perform logical mental actions known as operations. Their thinking is rigid and limited to one aspect of a situation at a time, heavily influenced by the immediate appearance of things.
According to Piagetian conservation tasks for the preoperational stage (2-7 years old), children lack the knowledge of conservation. Conservation refers to understanding that certain physical characteristics of objects remain the same even when their outward appearance changes. One example of Piaget’s test for conservation of number involves two rows with an equal number of objects (e.g., coins, fruits, candies) that are spaced equally apart. Initially, young children know that these two rows have the same number of objects. However, if one row is shortened, children fail to notice that the two rows still have the same amount.According to Piaget, young children have difficulty realizing that two rows are the same number because they are confused and do not perceive what adults see, which helps them understand the task. Piaget referred to the ability to understand this task as “in the face of a perceptual change,” and noted that young children are often fooled by the misleading appearance (Flavell, Miller, 1993).
Piaget’s conservation task for length involved showing young children two pencils, pens, or sticks of equal length. Initially, children recognized that the objects were the same length. However, if one stick was moved to make it appear longer than the other, children failed to comprehend that they were still equal in length. In Piaget’s conservation task for liquid, young children were shown two identical glasses containing the same amount of water or juice. Initially, children quickly recognized that the two glasses contained equal amounts. However, if the contents of one glass were poured into a taller and thinner glass, children were unable to realize that the taller glass still held the same amount of liquid as the original two glasses.
According to Piaget’s explanation, during the preoperational stage, children’s thinking is limited by what they perceive and they struggle to focus on multiple aspects of a situation. In these conservation tasks, they were attentive only to the height difference between the glasses and failed to comprehend that the taller glass still contained equal amounts of liquid as the original two.
My subject is a four-year-old girl named Lori, born in California. I have known her since she was a baby and often babysat Lori and her little brother, Mike, at my house on weekends. At around the age of two, I taught Lori a short Chinese poem which she could recite from memory, impressing both her parents and me. Her insatiable curiosity led her to frequently ask “what and why” questions, inspiring me with her warm hugs that made me happy. Recently, her parents enrolled her in a child day care center where only English is spoken, causing Lori to feel scared and frustrated. With her parents speaking only Chinese at home, she struggled to enjoy school. To comfort her, I invited Lori to my house where I could talk to her. Knowing that she had good memory and counting skills, I decided to test Lori on Piagetian conservation tasks due to her fascinating nature. Additionally, because she loved playing with me, Lori showed great interest in these activities.
My modifications in Piaget’s conservation tasks are as follows: first, I ensured that Lori’s full attention was on me throughout each step. This is in contrast to Piaget’s approach, as he did not consider whether the child was focused on his directions and explanations of the tasks (Berk, 1999). Second, to capture Lori’s interest in the tasks, I made an effort to engage her. I believe that young children like Lori benefit from tangible rewards. Hence, I used these tasks as a form of reward that Lori could take home after completing them with me. Third, I ensured that Lori had a basic understanding of numbers so that she could comprehend the measurements involved in the tasks. Lastly, I had Lori participate in these tasks alongside me. I allowed her to touch and physically engage with the tasks. This way, young children gain hands-on experience, enabling them to think more logically as they follow the processes.
When I first conducted Piaget’s conservation of number task with Lori, I did not use any modifications. Predictably, Lori provided an incorrect answer. She paid no attention to me and instead was curious about why I showed her the task. Her thoughts were elsewhere, and I struggled to get her to focus on the task. Following Piaget’s experiment, I arranged two rows of ten buttons each so that they were visually in one-to-one correspondence. One of the rows was directly above the other, and I asked Lori if the two rows were of equal length. She agreed that they were. Next, I moved the first row to make it appear longer than the second row. However, Lori did not notice that I had made this change. She saw only that the first row was now longer than the second row and therefore concluded that it contained more buttons. According to Piaget, Lori, being in the preoperational stage, “tends to be fooled by misleading perceptual appearance and judges that the longer row now contains more buttons.” This is why Lori failed the conservation of number task (Flavell & Miller, 1993).
In the conservation of liquid experiment, I replicated Piaget’s study. Lori initially agreed that two identical glasses hold equal amounts of water. I proceeded to pour the water from one glass into a taller and narrower glass while Lori observed. Then, I asked Lori if the two glasses still contained the same amount of water or if one glass now had more water than the other. In line with Piaget’s view, children at this preoperational stage struggle to understand the concept of liquid conservation. They merely perceive that the taller and narrower glass “seems to have more” and accept appearances as reality (Flavell, Miller, 1993).
I decided to use candy to make this task more enjoyable and interesting for Lori. She has a strong fondness for M&M candies. To start, I had Lori sit near the table so she could observe me setting up two rows of M&M candies. I made sure to count out loud as I placed seven candies in each row on the table. When Lori saw this, she noticed that both rows had an equal number of candies. She demonstrated her understanding by counting each row correctly, saying “one, two, three, four, five, six, seven” while touching each candy as she counted. Then, I mixed up the candies and asked Lori to replicate what I had done previously. Remarkably, she arranged two rows with an equal amount of candies because she remembered that each row should have seven candies. Once again, I asked Lori to compare the two rows and determine if they were the same. She confidently affirmed that they were indeed the same. Following this, I set up another set of candies with the same quantity as the first set. I asked Lori if her two rows matched mine, to which she replied “yes!” In order to test her understanding further, I moved the candies in the first row farther apart and instructed her to do the same with her initial rows. Then, I asked her to count the candies in each row, and she did so accurately. Finally, I posed the same question once more, and Lori’s response remained consistent: “they are the same.”
To modify this experiment with liquid conservation, I had Lori assist me in mixing colored fruit juice and pouring it into two identical glasses. Lori was thrilled to learn how to make juice and was very interested in the change of color in the water. In an effort to maintain her interest, I used a measuring cup to have Lori identify the number two on the cup so that both glasses had the same amount of juice poured into them. I asked her if the two glasses had the same amount of colored fruit juice, to which she answered “yes, they are the same.” Then, I asked her to help me pour the juice from one glass into a taller and thinner glass after having her measure the juice, confirming it was at the number two mark. I then asked her the question again and she immediately recognized that the taller and thinner glass had the same amount of juice as the one that appeared smaller.
In conclusion, Piaget would still argue that Lori is too young to successfully accomplish his conservation tasks. However, through my modifications, I have demonstrated significant improvement in Lori’s ability to correctly complete the tasks. Lori’s attention, understanding of numbers, and hands-on experiences with the tasks have helped her realize that changes in external appearances do not necessarily indicate changes in the tasks. Contrary to Piaget’s theory of stages and his tasks, the experiments show that young children like Lori (in the preoperational stage) are able to conserve both numbers and liquids at an early age.
References
The text includes the following resources with their respective details:
| Flavell, J.M., Miller, P.H., & Miller, S.A. (1993). Cognitive Development. (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall |
| Laura E. Berk. (1999). Infants and Children. (3rd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon |
Heinlein’s Greenest Beer Brewer: Stop Using Toxic Substances To Make Clothes
Worlds greenest beer brewer. Stop using toxic substances to make clothes. Examples of objectives (from Heinlein will reduce their CO emissions in complying with international treaties. Heinlein will also change at least three of its breweries to become carbon neutral. Greenback is setting up fashion victims. It will help people that live in circumstances that are not good for their health. They want also photos of people with their logo that says ‘no more fashion victims’. View of stakeholder 1: customers Are the one that consume the product.
They can have influence on the behavior of the brewery. Are the one that consume the product. They can have influence on the behavior of the brewery. Customers are the one that will see their campaign and will donate money Customers are the one that will see their campaign and will donate money View of stakeholder 2: employees Are the one that have to produce the product and know what is wrong with it. Are the one that have to produce the product and know what is wrong with it. Employees are the one that are working on the campaign and fulfill them
Employees are the one that are working on the campaign and fulfill them View of stakeholder 3: suppliers Suppliers know what kind of resources the company uses and if it is good for the health. Suppliers know what kind of resources the company Uses and if it is good for the health. Suppliers are the one that provide the company with equipment that they need for their campaigns. Suppliers are the one that provide the company with equipment that they need for their campaigns. View of stakeholder 4: owners The owners decide what the company does etc.
View of stakeholder 5: Managers The managers are running the departments, each department has its own manager. The managers are running the departments, each department has its own manager. The managers are running the departments, each department has its own manager. The managers are running the departments, each department has its own manager. View of stakeholder 6: Communities View of stakeholder 7: Government 3. Conclusion didn’t understand any of the m assignments so I picked one out and also I had not a lot of time so I just filled something in. My apologies for that.