Essay on The presentation of the ceramic book “Orientalism” by Jamelie HassanEssay Writing Service

Essay on The presentation of the ceramic book â€Å"Orientalism† by Jamelie HassanEssay Writing Service Essay on The presentation of the ceramic book â€Å"Orientalism† by Jamelie Hassan Essay on The presentation of the ceramic book â€Å"Orientalism† by Jamelie HassanThe presentation of the ceramic book â€Å"Orientalism† by Jamelie Hassan is quite symbolic in light of the unusual presentation of such a complex concept as oreinalism. The author has chosen ceramic as the medium to create the presentation. The choice of the medium is not occasional. In stark contrast, the artist apparently attempted to emphasize how precious the oriental culture and orientalism are for her. At the same time, the use of the ceramic book gives implications that it is virtually impossible to read and therefore understand. This is why, in spite of many contacts between European and representatives of the oriental civilization or civilizations, westerner still are not well informed of and cannot always understand the oriental culture and lifestyle.In this respect, the presentation made by Francine Savard, â€Å"Pluie Intermittente† is quite different from the presentat ion made by Jamelie Hassan. Her presentation includes the plywood with the acrylic on canvas mounted on it. In fact, the presentation seems to be just a box with the caption ‘pluie intermittente’ which actually is the name of the presentation. However, this is not a mere box but it is the symbolic representation of the weather which seem to be clear and square and easy to understand but, in actuality, it turns out to be a mystery just like the box which is installed on the plywood and symbolizing precipitations.The difference between the presentation made by Jamelie Hassan and the presentation made by Francine Savard can be traced not only through the difference of the medium used by the artists but also and mainly by the message conveyed by the artists. In fact, Hassan attempts to draw attention of the audience to the mysterious oriental civilization using the complex and artistically rich design of her presentation, whereas Savard returns to cubist traditions and uses the right cubic form of her work that manifests the intention of the artist to uncover the complex issue through the simple form. In this regard, the complexity of form makes the difference of the two works of art. In such a way, the artists attempt to convey their messages using different strategies but both artists attempt to convey complex issues.Furthermore, Hassan uses the extensive visualization in her presentation. The book contains images on its cover page and the title of the book is clearly written. The book is created in the oriental style that backs up the title. In stark contrast, Savard uses the simple form and the cubic presentation of the precipitation is quite unusual. At the same time, such a choice is very unusual but very effective because the depiction of precipitation in the presentation is very complex and the choice of the form mirrors the complexity of the depiction of mirrors in the artistic form. At the same time, both presentations imply the presence of the mystery which they hide successfully since viewers cannot view inside the book of Hassan or the box of Savard. In such a way, both artists suggest viewers to make their assumptions and to guess what actually may be hidden or implied by the artists.Savard offers the background of her work explaining how she prepares her exhibitions and presentations. She conducts the extensive study, analyzes various media resources before she prepares her exhibitions and presentations. Savard stresses that she uses not only color but also relationships between things which are of the utmost importance for her. She uses variations and exploration of languages as a combination of color, text, and form. She does not proceed the presentation chronologically. Instead, she arranges items taking into consideration the cultural background and messages she wants to convey to the audience.In general the presentation of Savard is more formal compared to the presentation made by Hassan. The latter makes her presentation more personal. She uses the friendly rather than formal tone. She admits personal references to her family and her past personal experience. Her presentation involves elements of the comparative study since she compares her cultural background to that of Canada and through references to her personal experience she uncovers her key messages and challenges which she has encountered. In this regard, her works contain elements which are typical for her culture. At the same time, Hassan attempts to combine those elements with elements that are traditionally attributed to Canadian and western culture. Unlike Savard, who considers relationships between objects she presents in her works are very important, Hassan stresses the importance of cultural and intercultural relationships through her works. At the same time, both Hassan and Savard prove to be proficient in their fields and view their works as the means of communication with the audience and tools with the help of which they can convey their messages to the audience.Thus, presentations made by Hassan and Savard are different in the form and content but still they imply the presence of some mystery which the audience has to uncover.

Battle of New Market in the Civil War

Battle of New Market in the Civil War The Battle of New Market occurred on May 15, 1864, during the American Civil War (1861-1865). In March 1864, President Abraham Lincoln elevated Major General Ulysses S. Grant to lieutenant general and gave him command of all Union armies. Having previously directed forces in the Western Theater, he decided to give operational command of the armies in this region to Major General William T. Sherman and moved his headquarters east to travel with Major General George G. Meades Army of the Potomac. Grants Plan Unlike the Union campaigns of the preceding years which sought to capture the Confederate capital of Richmond, Grants primary goal was the destruction of General Robert E. Lees Army of Northern Virginia. Recognizing that the loss of Lees army would lead to the inevitable fall of Richmond as well as would likely sound the death knell of the rebellion, Grant intended to strike the Army of Northern Virginia from three directions. This was made possible by the Unions superiority in manpower and equipment. First, Meade was to cross the Rapidan River east of Lees position at Orange Court House, before swinging west to engage the enemy. With this thrust, Grant sought to bring Lee to battle outside of the fortifications the Confederates had constructed at Mine Run. To the south, Major General Benjamin Butlers Army of the James was to advance up the Peninsula from Fort Monroe and threaten Richmond, while to the west Major General Franz Sigel laid waste to the resources of the Shenandoah Valley. Ideally, these secondary thrusts would draw troops away from Lee, weakening his army as Grant and Meade attacked. Sigel in the Valley Born in Germany, Sigel had graduated from the Karlsruhe Military Academy in 1843, and five years later served Baden during the Revolution of 1848. With the collapse of the revolutionary movements in Germany, he had fled first to Great Britain and then to New York City. Settling in St. Louis, Sigel became active in local politics and was an ardent abolitionist. With the start of the Civil War, he received a commission more based on his political views and influence with the German immigrant community than his martial ability.   After seeing fighting in the west at Wilsons Creek and Pea Ridge in 1862, Sigel was ordered east and held commands in the Shenandoah Valley and the Army of the Potomac. Through poor performance and an unlikable disposition, Sigel was relegated to unimportant posts in 1863. The following March, due to his political influence, he obtained command of the  Department of West Virginia. Tasked with eliminating the Shenandoah Valleys ability to provide Lee with food and supplies, he moved out with around 9,000 men from Winchester in early May. Confederate Response As Sigel and his army moved southwest through the valley towards their goal of Staunton, Union troops initially encountered little resistance. To meet the Union threat, Major General John C. Breckinridge hastily assembled what Confederate troops were available in the area. These were organized into two infantry brigades, led by Brigadier Generals  John C. Echols and Gabriel C. Wharton, and a cavalry brigade led by Brigadier General John D. Imboden. Additional units were added to Breckinridges small army including the 257-man Corps of Cadets from the Virginia Military Institute. Armies Commanders: Union Major General Franz Sigel6,275 men Confederate Major General John C. Breckinridge4,090 men Making Contact Though they had marched 80 miles in four days to join his army, Breckinridge hoped to avoid using the cadets as some were as young as 15. Advancing towards each other, Sigel and Breckinridges forces met near New Market on May 15, 1864. Deploying on a ridge north of the town, Sigel pushed skirmishers forward. Spotting the Union troops, Breckinridge opted to take the offensive. Forming his men south of New Market, he placed the VMI cadets in his reserve line. Moving out around 11:00 AM, the Confederates advanced through thick mud and cleared New Market within ninety minutes. The Confederates Attack Pressing on, Breckinridges men encountered a line of Union skirmishers just north of the town. Sending Brigadier General John Imbodens cavalry around to the right, Breckinridges infantry attacked while the horsemen fired on the Union flank. Overwhelmed, the skirmishers fell back to the main Union line. Continuing their attack, the Confederates advanced upon Sigels troops. As the two lines neared, they began exchanging fire. Taking advantage of their superior position, the Union forces began to thin out the Confederate line. With Breckinridges line starting to waver, Sigel decided to attack. With a gap opening in his line, Breckinridge, with great reluctance, ordered the VMI cadets forward to close the breach. Coming into line as the 34th Massachusetts began their attack, the cadets braced themselves for the onslaught. Fighting with Breckinridges seasoned veterans, the cadets were able to repel the Union thrust. Elsewhere, a thrust by Union cavalry led by Major General Julius Stahel was turned back by Confederate artillery fire. With Sigels attacks faltering, Breckinridge ordered his entire line forward. Surging through the mud with the cadets in the lead, the Confederates assaulted Sigels position, breaking his line and forcing his men from the field. Aftermath The defeat at New Market cost Sigel 96 killed, 520 wounded, and 225 missing. For Breckinridge, losses were around 43 killed, 474 wounded, and 3 missing. During the fighting, ten of the VMI cadets were killed or mortally wounded. Following the battle, Sigel withdrew to Strasburg and effectively left the Valley in Confederate hands. This situation would largely remain until Major General Philip Sheridan captured the Shenandoah for the Union later that year.