Directions: Actively read the following article posted below (also available for view at: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9906E2D91438F933A15756C0A9649C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=print)
1. Based in the following NY Times article, summarize Richard Minsky’s (the artists’) view on the Bill of Rights and it’s role in modern US society.
2. Analyze two of his criticisms based on your knowledge of US government and the Bill of Rights.
3. Finally, respond to the following question:Is the Bill of Rights reflected in or distorted in modern US society. Refer to anecdotal (personal stories) or academic evidence to support your answer.
Your blog must be a miniminum of 200 words and include a response to at least one other student's post.For your reference, a copy of the Bill of Rights is available on page and at: http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------May 20, 2002 "Artist Depicts the Bill of Rights in a World Out of Joint"
By RALPH BLUMENTHAL'
'I like art that gives you a reality fix,'' says Richard Minsky. A reality he treasures is the Bill of Rights, so Mr. Minsky, 55, a Greenwich Village artist and professional bookbinder, has found a way to exemplify the first 10 amendments to the Constitution as artworks.
For the First Amendment protecting freedom of expression, for example, he burned a copy of Salman Rushdie's ''Satanic Verses'' and sealed up the charred volume in an arabesque windowed reliquary.For the Sixth Amendment guaranteeing a speedy and public trial, he glued a black-leather glove daubed with red onto a copy of Jeffrey Toobin's best seller ''The Run of His Life: The People v. O. J. Simpson.'' (''I used paint, not real blood,'' Mr. Minsky said, ''not that I haven't, or wouldn't.'')And for the Eighth Amendment, barring cruel and unusual punishment, he took a book on penology, ''Forlorn Hope: The Prison Reform Movement'' by Larry E. Sullivan, a professor of criminal justice, rebound it in stripes and chained it to a little jail. ''You can take the book out for exercise,'' Mr. Minsky said, ''but then it must go back to its cell.''
The 10 works are on display at the Louis K. Meisel Gallery at 141 Prince Street in Soho through June 1. Twenty-five editions of the set are being offered at $18,000 each. (The works are viewable online at www.minsky.com.)Mr. Minsky, who has been exhibiting his art for 30 years and founded the nonprofit Center for Book Arts at 626 Broadway, said he thought long and hard about celebrating the amendments, whatever their consequences. ''While you got them, enjoy them,'' he said.For the Second Amendment on the right to bear arms he chose a book about violent hate groups, ''Gathering Storm: America's Militia Threat'' by Morris Dees of the Southern Poverty Law Center. Mr. Minsky depicts the author in the bull's-eye of a target.The Third Amendment, barring the forced quartering of soldiers in private homes, was represented by a reimagined nuclear football -- an attaché case like the one bearing the codes for unleashing atomic war. It contains a copy of ''Seven Days in May'' by Fletcher Knebel and Charles W. Bailey, a novel about the nation's top military commander seeking to commandeer the White House, and a DVD of the movie with Burt Lancaster and Kirk Douglas.For the Fourth Amendment, against unreasonable search and seizure, Mr. Minsky chose a copy of ''Neuromancer,'' William Gibson's 1984 science-fantasy novel presenting cyberspace as a realm vulnerable to governmental intrusion. He built a slipcase with an imbedded network interface card and hot-stamped it with the text of the amendment in hologram foil.
The Fifth Amendment, guaranteeing due process of law for criminal defendants, was exemplified by a novel in the form of an epic poem, ''Branches'' by Mitch Cullin, about a brutal Texas sheriff who takes the law into his own hands. Mr. Minsky bound the book in khaki, affixed a badge -- and peppered the cover with nine-millimeter slugs.For the Seventh Amendment, providing for jury trials in civil cases over $20, he selected ''The Litigation Explosion: What Happened When America Unleashed the Lawsuit'' by Walter K. Olson, and rebound it in mock $20 bills that replaced the image of President Andrew Jackson with that of James Madison, father of the Bill of Rights.For the Ninth Amendment, reserving all unenumerated rights to the people, Mr. Minsky highlighted ''the right to privacy,'' using a book of that name by Ellen Alderman and Caroline Kennedy and re-illustrating it with photos of Diana, Princess of Wales, including endpapers depicting her fatal car crash.The 10th Amendment, protecting states' rights, stumped Mr. Minsky for some time. ''I was wracking my brain, and then, out of nowhere, I thought of November-December 2000.''
He downloaded the United States Supreme Court decision intervening in the Florida-vote controversy and handing the presidential election to George W. Bush. Mr. Minsky bound the docket in brown leather like a law book with the spine title off-center. ''It's a little crooked,'' he said.The works are available only as a set, Mr. Minsky said. ''People ask me, 'Can I get one?''' he said. ''I say, 'The government is trying to take them away one by one; you have to have them all.' '
'Correction: May 23, 2002, Thursday An article in The Arts on Monday about Richard Minsky, an artist and bookbinder who has created artworks representing the Bill of Rights, gave an outdated address for the Center for Book Arts, a nonprofit group he founded in New York. It is at 28 West 27th Street, third floor
16 comments:
Teresa Konopka
Block H
AP US
Blog Posting
The Bill of Rights is often celebrated in America, not condemned. However, as the New York Times article Artist Depicts the Bill of Rights in a World Out of Joint by Ralph Blumenthal shows, the amendments can be both malevolent and benevolent. The artist Mr. Minsky portrayed each amendment negatively. “Mr. Minsky, who has been exhibiting his art for 30 years and founded the nonprofit Center for Book Arts at 626 Broadway, said he thought long and hard about celebrating the amendments, whatever their consequences” (Blumenthal 5/20/02). Apparently, in Minsky’s eyes, amendments gave citizens rights that they deserved, even though some took advantage of them. For example, even though the right to bear arms can be used for safety, certain hate groups use the right violently. As for the right against search and seizure, Minsky chose to include a science-fantasy novel about an all-powerful government searching whatever it pleases. It’s almost as if the Bill of Rights did nothing for Otis as he struggled against the Writs of Assistance years ago. Regardless, Minsky artistically proved that amendments could be providential and disastrous since Americans are allowed to back themselves up with the protection of the amendments. Although Minsky’s artwork seems to regurgitate rights as if they were palpable wrongs, they do make citizens wonder: Are the Bill of Rights as useful as they were intended to be? All throughout history, there have been acts passed and documents issued that--although made with good intentions--were not as fortunate as expected. For example, when Grenville proposed the Stamp Act to parliament, neither he nor the parliamentarians would envisage that it would cause Americans to loathe the British. In the eighteenth century, Americans had no idea that the Bill of Rights would turn on them. After all, in the preamble (introduces and comes before the Bill of Rights), it is stated that the amendments will be beneficial to the United States of America. Evidently, the founding fathers were no psychics!
Response:
There is no blog thus far to respond to, but if any students are interested, Minsky's graphic art can be viewed at http://www.minsky.com/meiselshow.htm.
Elizabeth Che - Block H
Based on the article, “Artist Depicts the Bill of Rights in a World Out of Joint” by Ralph Blumenthal, Richard Minsky’s view on the Bill of Rights is clearly negative, as mentioned by Teresa. Minsky’s art portraying the Bill of Rights showed the negated form of what the original plans for the Bills were. Instead of protecting the citizens, the Bill of Rights seemed to cause more commotion as there were no limits to intolerable behavior. The laws as shown through the art pieces, provided a stepping stone for wrong doings and the neglecting of moral conduct in modern US society.
Amendment I, which grants the US citizens the freedom of religion, speech, press, assemble and petition is one of the most commonly abused amendment. Although this amendment grants the citizens the ability to act under their own beliefs, morality should always be followed. But, since the world is not perfect, occurrences where someone may have taken a step out of the border line is common. As detailed in “Artist Depicts the Bill of Rights in a World Out of Joint,” Minsky’s art piece, “Reliquary for the Ashes of Salman Rushdie’s Satanic Verses,” shows how censorship is in place for “tabooed” topics. Even though the author of the book had the rights to write what he pleased, he did step on the toes of religion. But, as the first amendment allowed citizens to follow whichever religion they pleased, the book did qualify to be accepted in society. Yet, due to disfavoring opinions, the author lost his rights in certain countries. Thus, showing that the first amendment wasn’t upheld. Although the book has it’s own faults, it is this opinion that the viewers decide what is acceptable and what isn’t in modern society. However, the judgement, amendments should be maintained following a proper limitation as to reject extreme uses which can cause harm to the society.
Meanwhile, the Fifth Amendment, guarantees the citizens to fair trails, forbids someone from being forced to answer for an “infamous crime” unless under the presence of the Grand Jury, forbids someone to be charged for the same offence twice that may have the chance of injury, or be a witness against him/herself, or have anything taken away from him/her without the process of law, agreement or compensations. However, in Minsky’s Fifth Amendment piece, this amendment is portrayed to be unfair as there was no fair trail or equality within the court to properly solve a trial. As seen through the website listed in Teresa’s post, the book used for this specific piece dealt with the unjustified actions of a Sheriff who was the judge, jury and executioner. In other words, committed murder under the name of justice. In this scenario, the Fifth Amendment was violated as the victim never received a proper trial or obtained any of the rights which should have been given to him. Instead, the sheriff was the one who judged and took action against someone. There is no equality when the roles are played by only one person and there is no defendant to support the victim. Thus, showing negation of the amendment.
As explained by Teresa, the Bill of Rights is distorted in modern US society through the difference in views. Since no one in the world think exactly the same, there are always slight aversions in everything. The Amendments are of no exception as their surrounding use changed overtime. Through the advancement of technology, the Bill of Rights became miscalculated. During the colonial era, the US citizens were mainly guided by religion only. There was no greater influence that impacted their behavior. However, with more opportunities for citizens to do as they pleased, their actions strayed off the path causing the Amendments to be abused. As stated in Teresa’s post “Americans had no idea that the Bill of Rights would turn on them. After all, in the preamble (introduces and comes before the Bill of Rights), it is stated that the amendments will be beneficial to the United States of America.” So, as morals were slowly forgotten, the limit to tolerance slowly increased until it hit the outer boundary of acceptance. But, once past the ideal “good” basis of actions, the Amendments become unuseable as there is no limitation the actions of the citizens stated in the Bill of Rights.
John Harden
Block H
November.1, 2007
Artist and professional bookbinder Richard Minsky successfully shows how the Bill of Rights is distorted in modern day American society. His artwork, regarding Amendments one and three make a great deal of sense and prove that the Amendments are ignored by the government. For example, Amendment 1, the so called foundation of American society is constantly distorted and ignored by the government. In many schools across America, it is illegal for a student to say anything, even if it is just a belief if it can be mentally harmful or offensive to other students. It is understandable and justified in my mind in many situations, but the amendment still should not say that there is total freedom of speech. The first Amendment was ignored many times throughout American history as well, especially during the Civil Rights Movement. Any blacks who even non-violently expressed their opinions in the south, like the Freedom Riders or Rosa Parks, were jailed. During McCarthyism era, if someone supported Communism openly, or even discussed Communism, they were jailed with an unjust trial. The Ninth Amendment was broken many times during the 1950’s and is believed to be broken today. Although no evidence can be found proving that the National Security Agency is searching and tapping innocent people’s houses, they are believed to be tapping all phones and listening into phone conversations. During the McCarthyism era, people’s conversations were monitored by the House of Un -American Activities, who were trying to find Communist supporters in America. It seems that these Amendments are ignored during times of war or rights movements, because the American government wants to protect themselves and keep their seat in power. I must once again agree with Teresa, she stated that the founding fathers were not psychics. How were they suppose to know the world would change so drastically over time, maybe it is time the laws are changed to suit current times and hardships?
Richard Minsky mocks the Bill of Rights by illustrating the falseness of many of the amendments in today’s society. As an artist with strong beliefs, Minsky implies on how our society is being robbed by the government of our rights little by little. Like Minsky said, “While you got them, enjoy them” Through his art, Minsky seems to be suggesting that the Bill of Rights no longer exists in America today. Perhaps he believes that only certain people have the amendments benefiting their lifestyle, while the Bill of Rights should be benefiting all lifestyles.
There were two modern art pieces that quickly caught my attention. In the Ninth Amendment, the right to privacy was highly promoted. Hence the usages of past tense, as modern celebrities today are severely affected by the media and its crazy paparazzi. Minsky uses Princess Diana as a perfect example. Throughout her entire life, the media violated her privacy, even causing her death in a car accident. Celebrities are followed on a daily basis, as Americans have become obsessed with their personal daily doings. The Ninth Amendment declares the right to privacy, yet why aren’t certain people receiving their privacy? Another piece of art that I found interesting was the piece illustrating the deceit of the Tenth Amendment. The Tenth Amendment specifically protects the rights of a state. However, recently during the 2000 Presidential Elections, the Florida-vote controversy depicted this amendment as a joke. Minsky probably believes that the elections were fixed for President Bush to win. Truly, the government has the final say, not the people. Perhaps this violation of the Tenth Amendment was not made into a big deal, as the people of Florida were probably not even alert of what was really going on.
Thus, the Bill of Rights is distorted in modern US society. The document has come a long way since 1791. The Bill of Rights has witnessed obstacles, struggles, challenges, experiences and most of all change. Throughout the years, ideas, beliefs and thoughts are continuously transformed. Thus it is sadly expected for the Bill of Rights to be fuzzy, unclear and vague. As the people of America, we are abusing the amendments, taking advantage of the amendments, and criticizing the amendments all at once. We individually interpret differently, thus affecting the way we view certain amendments. There are so many people in this world, so it’s hard to satisfy everyone at once. Overall, the Bill of Rights is still alive, as it will always be there for Americans to depend on if they feel violated or oppressed. However, it is not greatly reflected as we would all like it to be.
In response to John, I also believe the government is ignoring our amendments. The Bill of Rights will always be in America to lean on; however it is continuously being overshadowed by other powers. It’s like playing a game with little children. They are forever making up their own rules, as their goal is to win the game. The rules they make up would always benefit their self. These amendments are forever bended and twisted to assist certain people.
Justin Lefkowitz
AP US History
H Block
The United States Bill of Rights was finally ratified in 1791, when they became a part of the United States Constitution as the first ten amendments. The Bill of Rights was supposed to be a group of inalienable rights for every American citizen. The key word in that sentence is supposed. In my opinion, the Bill of Rights is distorted in modern US society. One person who agrees with me is Richard Minsky. Minsky’s view could be seen in the Ralph Blumenthal article in the New York Times, entitled, "Artist Depicts the Bill of Rights in a World Out of Joint." Richard Minsky, an artist from Greenwich Village, made a piece of artwork that shows a piece of history, or a story, or a painting that contradicts each of the first ten amendments of the Constitution, which are also called the Bill of Rights. His depictions of each amendment are quite interesting.
In Minsky’s piece of artwork depicting the ten amendments, what he did for the Fifth Amendment stands out the most. The Fifth Amendment, which guarantees the due process of law for criminal defendants, was exemplified by the epic poem, ''Branches'' by Mitch Cullin. “Branches” is about a brutal Texas sheriff who takes the law into his own hands. This totally goes against the Fifth Amendment. The people who enforce the law around the world, also known as the police, are not allowed to take the law into their own hands. It is illegal to take down someone even if they break the law. They must be properly tried.
In Minsky’s piece of artwork, I feel that he does not detail the First Amendment as well as I think that he could have done. The First Amendment, in my mind, is the most important one. The First Amendment gives people freedom of religion, speech, and press. It also gives people the right to assemble and petition. For his piece of artwork, Minsky burned a copy of Salman Rushdie's ''Satanic Verses'' and sealed up the charred volume in an arabesque windowed reliquary. “Satanic Verses” showed freedom of press, but its what happened after the book that showed the blocking of the First Amendment. People who disagree with his book are harming Rushdie and many countries believe he should be killed for his beliefs stated in the book.
I definitely agree with John’s blog. The US Bill of Rights is definitely distorted in modern US society and the government is definitely ignoring all of our rights. For example, the First Amendment has not been working to well. We are not free as people at all. Our superiors control us at all times. For example, the teachers control us in school and our parents control us at home. In school, if I were to say something like sh*t, I would be sent to the Principal’s Office immediately. You see that. I censored myself out of fear of what would happen to me. And Mrs. Francis, you cannot hold me back if I said something like that either. I am allowed to say that according to the US Bill of Rights, which I have learned are inalienable, which means that these rights cannot be surrendered.
Michelle Shed
AP US History
Block H
“Artist Depicts the Bill of Rights in a World Out of Joint” by Ralph Blumenthal, proves that artist, Mr. Minsky, is dissatisfied with the Ten Amendments of the Constitution. He believes that they are hypocritical and don't relate to today's society. Ratified in 1791, the Ten Amendments created the basis of an American foundation and symbolized the American principles and society's beliefs. Unlike Mr. Minsky, I believe the Ten Amendments aren't hypocritical. Instead, they were simply written at a time when society wasn't so liberal. However, that's the case with today's society. We are too liberal. There are artists, like Mr. Minsky, who always have to critique our government. Whether it's the death penalty or the War in Iraq, people like Mr. Minsky are influencing society to view our government in a negative way.
"For the First Amendment protecting freedom of expression, for example, he burned a copy of Salman Rushdie's ''Satanic Verses'' and sealed up the charred volume in an arabesque windowed reliquary." Mr. Minsky believes that we aren't fully allowed to express our opinions. Sounding extremely like a liberal, it sounds like he is talking about McCarthyism. The thing with McCarthyism is that it goes against democracy. It is a separate system of government. Our country; our fore fathers fought so hard to achieve independence form the British. Why would we want to ruin their hard work just because there are those whose liberal opinions blind them from rationality? (No offense to communist sympathizers).
There were even those in the United States that were funding communist countries like China and the USSR. It was illegal and yet, people still supported/funded it. Another point I'd like to make is that Communism wasn't founded until 1848 when Karl Marx wrote The Communist Manifesto. As new ideas and philosophies are created, society begins to see certain issues in a new light. It's not that the Ten Amendments are hypocritical or that we are not fully allowed to express ourselves. It's just that there are some people in the world who feel that there could be more freedom. However, this is a matter of opinion.
"For the Sixth Amendment guaranteeing a speedy and public trial, he glued a black-leather glove daubed with red onto a copy of Jeffrey Toobin's best seller ''The Run of His Life: The People v. O. J. Simpson.''" Mr. Minsky believes that there is some sort of fault with that. Personally, I don't understand what that is. The only thing I see wrong was that OJ Simpson got off innocent. He killed his wife and child. He deserves to go to jail.
That's the thing with liberal ideas. A wise man once said, " A good smack does more for a child than words." This applies for today. We let men like OJ Simpson off and they still get in trouble with the law again. That's something that should be changed in society. Putting people in jail is expensive and comes from our taxes. It's easier to just give them injections and let them die easily.
I'm not saying that our government is like El Dorado. This is not the case. I am simply saying that I don't view our government the way he does. I believe that a little order and tradition is important. Too much freedom can cause anarchy, socialism or a communist nation. Call me crazy, but that's the way I am.
The job of the government is to collect our taxes and to protect the interests of the people. This is currently being done right now. Why Mr. Minsky feels the need to complicate things and change things is beyond me. I suppose it is a matter of opinion. Just because he feels there are problems with the Constitution doesn't necessarily mean there are.
Ashley Aydin.
AP US – Block H.
In modern society, the Bill of Rights has evolved to far more than just a set of basic, fundamental principles. "Artist Depicts the Bill of Rights in a World Out of Joint" by Ralph Blumenthal describes Richard Minsky’s feel about the potential contradictory ideals posed to our very population. To many, the debated guidelines and stirring statements included in the Bill of Rights proves a hodgepodge of fancy words and dull undertakings. In his works, Minsky portrayed the lack of enforcement on such values while also delving deeply into the often speculated subjects of parity and moderation.
Minsky, in pieces, saw right to express his dislike of how the Bill of Rights is rarely acknowledged or prized in contemporary times. “For the Second Amendment on the right to bear arms he chose a book about violent hate groups, ‘Gathering Storm: America's Militia Threat’ by Morris Dees of the Southern Poverty Law Center. Mr. Minsky depicts the author in the bull's-eye of a target.” Although a significant part of American history, the Bill of Rights has only shaped society for slight time. With aims of targeting the faults of the document, Minsky criticized the Bill of Right’s celebration of Amendments I and IV.
Amendment I:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
Amendment IV:
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
Nonetheless, Minsky, seems to believe that such alterations have been overlooked in every feature of life – education, employment, finance, politics, and general ethics. Why do we criticize pupils who speak against political bodies? Why do we shun minority factions who are dissimilar to us? Why do we not, after hundreds of years, have a stable, diplomatic environment based on the beauties of individualism? Minsky highlights these inquiries in an elegant and creative manner.
Similar to Minsky’s purpose, the New York Times article “We’re No Angels”, by Kathryn Harrison, covers the narrowing of Amendment XV and ideas about women entitlement.
Amendment XV:
“The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.”
The article, discussing the book Well- Behaved Women Seldom Make History by Laurel Thatcher Ulrich, touches on the crucial topic of why women are so regularly condoned. “Women have long perceived their status, at least in the United States, as analogous to that of blacks (and, by extension, other people of color). Here we’ve arrived at the 21st century yet to become citizens first and women second, our successes still the exception and never the rule in any career that isn’t inherently decorative, or doesn’t require changing sheets or bandages, or taking off clothing. That women don’t have voices but female voices is obvious from the way our vote is courted, our leanings studied as if influenced by whim or superstition or, heaven forbid, hormones (never a problem for men, of course).” Why haven’t women achieved their aspirations of becoming dominant throughout the years? Why are females continually oppressed due to their girlish manner? Frankly, the majority of the populace has contributed to the instability of amendments pro women; whether it is related to the work place and/or any other competitive facet of life, women have been subjugated by men.
Overall, the Bill of Rights has been supportive in developing our nation’s goals; however the manuscript has yet to implement exact morals and mindsets toward tranquility and personal independence. Thus, it can be easily inferred that the Bill of Rights is needy of revision and truth.
*Justin highlights accurate points in his argument. In school, we are silenced from publicizing our true opinions. We must limit ourselves to accepted and traditional actions. This argument contributes to a very complex topic of individual rights and norms one should abide by.
LINK TO "We're No Angels":
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/30/books/review/harrison.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
Ralph Blumenthal’s “Artist Depicts the Bill of Rights in a World Out of Joint“, featured in the New York Times on May 20, 2002, discusses artist Richard Minsky’s view on the Bill of Rights and its role in society today. Minsky felt the need to create visual depictions of each of the Ten Amendments to the United States Constitution. He proceeded to portray each of the ten using books and other items attached to them that are popularly known and somehow tied into the given amendment. Most of the depictions used commonly known situations from history that could be seen as examples of each of the amendments. “For the Sixth Amendment guaranteeing a speedy and public trial, he glued a black-leather glove daubed with red onto a copy of Jeffrey Toobin's best seller ''The Run of His Life: The People v. O. J. Simpson.'' (''I used paint, not real blood,'' Mr. Minsky said, ''not that I haven't, or wouldn't.'')”. Minsky’s book and accessory choice for the Sixth Amendment are both extremely relatable for the American public because many people are commonly familiar with the O.J. Simpson case. Minsky’s portrayal for that particular amendment really brings the terms of the Sixth Amendment to an observer on a more literal and visual level. “''People ask me, 'Can I get one?''' he said. ''I say, 'The government is trying to take them away one by one; you have to have them all.' '“. Minsky’s response makes lighter the case of Americans being stripped of their individual rights one by one. What he’s saying is completely true; each day the government pushes a little further into limiting our rights guaranteed in the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution. It’s a scary realization for one to come to; therefore, Minsky mocks the viewers’ desires for the art by interpreting it as a desire for their rights. In modern United States society, the Bill of Rights tends to be distorted. The First Amendment guarantees freedom of expression to all American citizens. However, in the case of school newspapers, this right is determined by a school’s principal. A school’s principal has the right to enforce censorship upon the contents of a school publication. Are American students not considered to be American citizens? It’d be unreasonable to say that students are too young to be given such a privilege because you can’t stop someone from being able to express themselves. At a young age, children are urged to express themselves. It’s similar to the Pringles slogan - “Once you pop, the fun don’t stop”. Once you begin to express yourself, you can’t just stop. The Fourth Amendment is “against unreasonable search and seizure”. This amendment is clearly violated by the Military Commissions Act of 2006, which gave the government to arrest any United Citizen and restrict them from the right of habeas corpus; therefore, any citizen of the United States could be imprisoned for any length of time and be denied any information or evidence for the arrest. In response to Heather’s comment, I’d have to disagree on Minsky mocking the Bill of Rights. I think Minsky is just taking the definition of each of the Ten Amendments and putting them into terms that make it easier for the general American public to understand and comprehend. He provides the American society with a visual of their rights, which can sometimes make things easier to understand.
Margaret Scalesci
Block- H
11-1-07
Richard Minsky is “celebrating the amendments” but is mocking the government because they are not rightly displayed. He showed his opinion through his work, without having to say anything. For example for his artwork representing the sixth amendment he used the trial of O.J. Simpson, which was unfair. He is trying to show us that the Bill of Rights is not taken as seriously as it was when it was first created. It should be because it is an important and powerful document that displays out rights as American citizens. I also like the example that he used for the Fifth Amendment because it really made a strong point. This man who took the law into his own hands, which isn’t what’s supposed to happen, really makes a good opposite of how it really is supposed to be. How it is isn’t how it’s supposed to be. For the Ninth amendment he referenced Princess Diana and this amendment is the right to privacy. We know that Princess Diana died in a car accident that was caused by the paparazzi. This completely went against the Bill of Rights because her death was caused by a lack of privacy. The point that he is trying to make is that the true and strong meaning of the Bill of Rights has been lost through the years. No one really takes it as seriously anymore. One thing that I really like is when he says “The government is trying to take them away one by one; you have to have them all.” What he is saying here is really important because we need all of the amendments not just a few. They are all important and needed. It is a right as an American citizen to have all of these amendments at our use. Obviously Minsky disagrees with the ways of the government and how they handle things. The Bill of rights isn’t how it is supposed to be in modern United States. In this today’s world things aren’t how they were planned. If the government isn’t going to follow the rules that were made by previous people in the government, maybe they should make up new rules. Maybe they should make a modernized version of the Bill of Rights, so this way we can say we follow the rules. This probably won’t happen but it’s just a suggestion.
In response to Heather, I completely agree with you. His use of Princess Diana as an example was a perfect one. Many people do not receive their privacy and it is a right as an American citizen to obtain these rights. This is an issue since some people aren’t getting the same treatment. I also agree that the Bills are being overshadowed by other powers and they are becoming less important. That the government is ignoring our amendments and they should not be.
In response to Justin I also agree that the example that Minsky used for the Fifth Amendment was one of the most important and strongest examples. This example completely contradicts what the Bill states. This Texas sheriff takes the law into his own hands which is not what he should be doing.
And to Rachael the military Commissions act of 2006 was an awesome example. =]
Sarah Berfond
In the article “Artist Depicts the Bill of Rights in a World Out of Joint” by Ralph Blumenthal, Richard Minsky talks about his art exhibit currently showing in New York City. The theme of his work is the Bill of Rights. The artist designed a different interpretation for each of the Ten Amendments. My favorites were the Eighth Amendment, barring cruel and unusual punishment and the Fifth Amendment’s due process of law for criminal defendants. I agree with Mr. Minsky’s interpretation of the Eighth and Fifth Amendments. For the cruel and unusual treatment clause a book about prisoner’s rights was decorated with a prison uniform and chained in a little jail. It appears that the artist was being satirical in his criticism of the horrible conditions which exist in many jails. He is correct. From what I have seen men and women who are incarcerated suffer human indignities that rise up to the level of cruel and inhuman treatment. Prisoners should not be let out of jail, they should be rehabilitated. In his criticism of the way the Fifth Amendment is treated, Minsky covered a book about a sheriff who takes the law into his own hands and covered it in khaki, affixed a badge -- and peppered the cover with nine-millimeter slugs. In America today some amendments are abided by while others are ignored. For example, Every American citizen has protection against illegal searches and seizures of their property and homes. Before the police can enter a house or car they must obtain a search warrant or believe that a criminal activity is taking place. However, the First Amendment, freedom of speech has been violated recently. In Colombia college one student was tasered for forcefully speaking out against a political guest speaker. The First Amendment guarantees Americans the right to express their opinions without being suppressed. This was not the case at Columbia.
Response to Ashley Ayden- I agree that the Bill of Rights is in need of a detailed revision. Today’s society is much different than when the Bill of Rights was written. The contradiction creates confusion in the amendments’ interpretation. Another problem facing the interpretation of the Bill of Rights is that the amendments are too broad and leave too much room for interpretation.
In the New York Times article, “Artist Depicts the Bill of Rights in a World Out of Joint,” artist Richard Minsky created artworks out of the words of the Bill of Rights. “Mr. Minsky, who has been exhibiting his art for 30 years and founded the nonprofit Center for Book Arts at 626 Broadway, said he thought long and hard about celebrating the amendments, whatever their consequences. ‘While you got them, enjoy them,’ he said.” It seems as if Mr. Minsky is challenging the Bill of Rights. He is pushing his freedom of speech to the highest level and creating satirical works of art. His work is based on ten amendments from the Bill of Rights.
For the Ninth Amendment, which states, “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people,” Mr. Minsky took a book called “The Right to Privacy” by Ellen Alderman and Caroline Kennedy and covered it in picture of Princess Diana Spencer. He covered pictures of her life, all the way to her tragic death. I think he was trying to say that this Amendment obviously isn’t working so well since the paparazzi were the first ones blamed for her death.
For the Eight Amendment which states, “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted,” Mr. Minsky took a book entitled, “Forlorn Hope: The Prison Reform Movement” by Larry E. Sullivan, put it in stripes and chained it to a little jail. He seems to think prisoners don’t have harsh enough punishments, which I’m sure in many cases is very true. The Amendment is protecting criminals who did something very bad to wind up in jail in the first place. No one who took another human life should even have a thought about being bailed out of jail.
I agree with Ashlee Aydin, in her argument that what once may have been great for America, could have changed quite a bit with all the advancements America has made. The Bill of Rights is in need of some revisions or rewording in order to ensure our country’s safety and freedom.
Marco Muniz
LATE
11/5/07
“Artist depicts the Bill of Rights in a world out of joint”, by Ralph Blementhal of the New York Times, is about Richard Minsky’s artwork. Even though Minsky absolutely loves the Bill of Rights, he wanted to show everyone through art how certain amendments are almost false in modern society!
Particularly, two of his criticisms seem to undeniably prove that some amendments are and continue to be broken. His criticism of the sixth amendment, the right to a speedy trial that sometimes the amendment is not followed through is correct. As proof, he refers to the novel “Run of His Life: The People v. O. J. Simpson” and says he painted it in red to represent blood. Those who don’t know what the book is about wouldn’t understand why he painted it. The novel is basically about the O.J Simpson murder case, which took 134 days to finish. He painted it in blood to show how the amendment isn’t enforced. Furthermore, his criticism of the fourth amendment, barring cruel and unusual punishment, is also entirely correct. He chained a book called ''Forlorn Hope: The Prison Reform Movement'' to a little jail to represent prison cruelty. The novel is basically about how prisons continue to use cruel punishment on prisoners before the amendment was even made.
In support of Minsky’s criticism, the Bill of Rights is undeniably distorted in modern society. For example, freedom of speech is heavily distorted, as CSIHS journalists cannot use their first amendment right to write whatever we want in the newspaper. I want to have the ability to write Bush is an idiot in my high school newspaper; I absolutely hate having limits to what I can write. It’s a stupid limit to my freedom of expression. Moreover, the fourth amendment right, no unreasonable search and seizure, is being ignored in modern society. For example when I send an email to a friend, officials can seize and read it without my permission.
The New York Times article shows Minsky’s criticisms of the Bill of Rights, and I completely agree with him that some amendments are being broken by our government. “The Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added,” states the declaration of Independence, but I say, why bother writing it, if the government is still going to abuse it!
In response to Jackie
The Bill of Rights does not need to be changed. The goverment just needs to follow it. It's as simple as that.
Marco - G+
Theresa - E-
Elizabeth - E
John - G
Heather -E
Justin - E
Michele - E
Ashley E+ - i like that you directly quoted the Constitution.
Rachel - G+
Margaret - G+
Sarah - G+
Jaclyn - G
Marco - G+
Theresa - E-
Elizabeth - E
John - G
Heather -E
Justin - E
Michele - E
Ashley E+ - i like that you directly quoted the Constitution.
Rachel - G+
Margaret - G+
Sarah - G+
Jaclyn - G
Post a Comment