Music Listening Journal Blog: Song Review Essay Example For College

Life So Right

“Life So Right” is a song written and performed by a talented young woman from Holland, Mariska Baars. She has been singing since 2002 under the pseudonym “Soccer Committee.” Almost all of her songs, including “Life So Right” belong to the genre of lowercase. This music genre is relatively new, as it appeared only in the second half of the 20 century. Initially, this genre was composed by an American sound artist, Steve Roden.

He characterized it as a specific type of music that “bears a certain sense of quiet and humidity, does not demand attention, and must be discovered” (Bandcamp Daily 2019). Indeed, listening to the songs written according to the main standards of this style, one can feel peace and quickly turn into a relaxing atmosphere. In terms of the song “Life So Right”, it helps a listener to recover after a long working day. Also, it gives an understanding that all the problems and life vanity are not that important as internal harmony in one’s heart.

Leave me Alone

“Leave me Alone” is a popular song of the 1980s, composed and performed by an Englishman Bernard Sumner and his colleagues Peter Hook and Stephen Morris. Together, they formed a rock band “New Order”, which was previously known as “Joy Division”. The song is written in the rock genre, which originated in the 1950s in the United Kingdom and formed based on blues and country music.

Even though the song is played by bass guitars and drums, “Leave me Alone” did not turn out to be very loud and disturbing. Instead, it is vivid and energetic and brings positive and warm vibes. The motive of the song is mainly built only on two chords, but it did not make the sound of the composition too simple. Even though this song was created more than 30 years, due to its casual tone, one can never be tired of listening to it.

References

“The “Lowercase Music” Genre is Ambient as Its Most Minimal.” Bandcamp Daily, 2019.

Interviews In Survey Research

An interview is a fundamental tool that is used in survey research. Also known as oral questionnaires, interviews allow scientists to cooperate directly with the subjects of their studies. Even though conducting an interview seems an easy task, this activity is more challenging than just discussing a specific topic with people. Thus, the given paper will discuss the significant role of interviews in non-experimental research, present their advantages over other structured tools, and explain when it is more reasonable to use interviews.

To begin with, one should state that the interview occupies an essential role in non-experimental research. It is so because this tool makes it possible for researchers to obtain information that might otherwise be challenging to identify, “including firsthand knowledge of people’s feelings and perceptions” (Salkind, 2011, p. 199). Furthermore, interviews allow researchers to cooperate with their sample directly, eliminating the possibility that some essential information will be lost.

Numerous advantages of the interviews explain why this tool is so significant in research. Firstly, this tool allows scientists to judge respondents’ non-verbal behavior, which is necessary to evaluate their credibility and trustworthiness. Secondly, this type of conducting research is suitable to obtain information from people who cannot read and write (Sociology Group, 2019). Some scientific works focus on this part of the population, and interviews are the most useful way to obtain feedback from such individuals. Thirdly, the tool under consideration provides researchers with higher flexibility that allows them to pursue any direction within the project (Salkind, 2011). The final advantage of interviews over the other structured tools is that scientists “can set the general tone and agenda” at their own convenience (Salkind, 2011, p. 199).

In addition to that, it is rational to state that the advantages above can manifest themselves if particular conditions are present. Firstly, it usually takes sufficient time to conduct candid interviews (Salkind, 2011). Consequently, this tool is suitable in those cases when there are no strict temporal constraints. Secondly, it is more reasonable to rely on interviews when there is no opportunity that the absence of anonymity can prevent respondents from telling the truth (Salkind, 2011). For example, it is better to use anonymous questionnaires to research such issues as drug abuse, domestic violence, and others. Thirdly, the tool under consideration is better when research questions imply long answers, and when participants may need additional explanation to answer the questions. Finally, one should emphasize that the results of interviews can be inadequate if researchers are subject to any bias (Salkind, 2011). That is why it is not necessary to use this method when scientists have a prejudiced opinion concerning their topic.

In conclusion, it has been shown that interviews occupy an essential role in survey research. It is so because they allow scientists to cooperate with their respondents directly and obtain firsthand information. It is explained by the presence of many advantages, including the opportunities to judge respondents’ non-verbal behavior, receive information from people who cannot read and write, and achieve greater flexibility of research. In addition to that, one should note that interviews contribute to better outcomes under particular conditions. Thus, scientists should use this tool when they have sufficient time, need lengthy answers, and can ensure that the absence of anonymity will not be a barrier. Finally, one should mention that a bias can lead to unsatisfactory results of the interview.

References

Salkind, N. J. (2011). Exploring research (8th ed.). Pearson.

Sociology Group. (2019). Advantages and disadvantages of interview in research

Campbell’s Soup Cans By Andy Warhol. Picture Analysis

The purpose of art is to inspire, as well as to be thought-provoking, but sometimes an artist opts to be just provocative instead. Andy Warhol ranks among the most eminent figures of the 20th-century art. Extravagant on the verge of audacity, he defied traditional perception of the matter and promoted a brand new approach called Pop Art. Warhol presented his Campbell’s Soup Cans in 1962, outraging the critics that were surprised by the work’s simplicity. The purpose of this paper is to examine Andy Warhol’s Campbell’s Soup Cans as a controversial work of art of the 20th century.

The work in question consists of thirty-two canvases, each having a painting of Campbell’s Soup can over it. Warhol chose the number deliberately to cover each variety of the soup available at the time. According to the artist, he painted the cans because he “used to have the same lunch every day, for twenty years” (Flatley, 2017, p. 96). Flatley (2017) notes that Warhol’s idea of liking something consisted in repetition, i.e., doing the same pleasant thing one time after another in a machine-like fashion. This work attracted much attention, and while some critics were against it, it showed the public that everything could be art. According to Flatley (2017), “Warhol’s everyday consumption of Campbell’s soup appears to be a perfect mirror of its mass production” (p. 96). In other words, the artist picked a subject that was relevant to most of his audience to show that art is not necessarily something sophisticated or abstract. Warhol saw beauty in modern and mundane aspects of life, which inevitably had a positive response on behalf of the audience, to whom the topic is close and relevant.

The work in question was never censored, as it did not directly offend anyone. Nevertheless, it was faced with condescendence on behalf of some critics. As Gene Swanson mentioned during his interview with Warhol, “Barbara Rose made an interesting point in that thing about Pop Art is not a style” (Sichel, 2018, p. 63). The critic’s opinion derives from the fact that there is no specific manner in which Pop Art works are created, unlike traditional styles, such as Abstract Expressionism that dominated at the time. Warhol responded that, to some extent, Rose was right but later mentioned that there was no way to “say that an Abstract Expressionist is better than, you know, a Pop artist” (Sichel, 2018, p. 74). His idea was that there did not exist a superior style, and one could find beauty in any mundane object, such as a can of soup.

In general, art censorship is rarely justified in today’s society. In the past, censorship was an effective tool that allowed monarchs and churches to enact control over the population with the objective of protecting their power. As values have shifted toward the present day, freedom of speech and expression is now considered of paramount importance. Every piece of art promotes creative thinking and deserves to find its audience without external control. It is every individual’s personal decision to accept or reject the idea of a particular work.

All in all, Andy Warhol managed to revolutionize the public’s perception of art. Campbell’s Soup Cans served to promote the idea that art is not limited to abstract forms and is available to everyone. Following Warhol’s experiments, Pop Art received due recognition on the global scale, thus contributing to art popularization. Therefore, this work deserves to be listed among the most significant pieces of the 20th century because of its undeniable impact on the industry.

References

Flatley, J. (2017). Like Andy Warhol. The University of Chicago Press.

Sichel, J. (2018). ‘Do you think Pop Art’s queer?’ Gene Swenson and Andy Warhol. Oxford Art Journal, 41(1), 59–83.

error: Content is protected !!