The Art Cart

President Bush is in town!

2005-05-19T11:16:00.000-07:00

My daily trip to school on Lincoln Memorial Drive was interupted by police cars blocking all access. That's right, I forgot the president is in town and where else is visiting while in town but the Milwaukee Art Museum (MAM). This building, designed by Spanish archetect Santiago Calatrava is Milwaukee's newest icon. Just Monday they reached it reached its goal of paying off its debt acquired after adding the Quadracci Pavilion back in October 2001. Our art museum gives Milwaukee a new sense of pride and will surely leave a lasting impression on our president. Check out this cute article written in the Journal Setinal today- http://www.jsonline.com/onwisconsin/arts/may05/327017.asp

School's out for summer... but I'll keep bloggin'.

2005-05-12T11:03:00.000-07:00

Thanks to everyone who read my blog. I will continue to post, though not as often as it is no longer an assignment, so please keep visiting. Next week I hope to visit the Milwaukee Art Museum to check out the Degas exhibit. Hopefully it is as great as the previous Masterpieces in American Art. At the very least it will give me more to blog about. I will also post my latest paintings- now that I will be out of classes I'll have more time to paint. Yes, summer's here!

2005-05-07T09:01:00.000-07:00

Paola Pivi Untitled (Donkey) 2003

2005-05-07T08:53:00.000-07:00

Cindy Sherman Untitled #175 1987

Globalist Art in a Globalized World

2005-05-05T11:46:00.000-07:00

The primary characteristics of globalist art is pretty obvious- it's art that responds to globalization, nationality, and the expanded circulation of capitol. From the works I studied in this genre, I find it hard to distinguish from any other type of contemporary art- abstract expressionism, surrealism, conceptual, post modernism- I guess what I'm trying to say is that it looks like any other type of art until you get the explanation behind the work.
One piece of globalized art that I really took a liking to is Paola Pivi's Untitled (Donkey), 2003.
Originally it was shown as a billboard in Venice. This absurd image of a donkey on a boat conveys a sad isolation. Pivi took two of the oldest forms of transportation and displayed them together making them economic of two faces of globalization- a reference/allusion to the mobility of people which in turn caused the mobility of money and the displacement that occurred because of the movement. This strange subject with no sense of place opens new spaces or a sense of passage that no one uses.
I love this painting, it makes me feel happy, but at the same time lonely due to its strong sense of isolation. Even with out an explanation of its deep meaning I would still enjoy this painting if I knew nothing of it and just stumbled upon it at an art museum.

Art has gone to shit!

2005-04-28T21:28:00.000-07:00

When did art go from beauty to disgust? Art has literally gone to shit, and vomit, and semen, and blood and other forms of mucus. YUCK! This art movement is art known as abject. The term was brought to prominence in 1993 by an exhibition at the Whitney Museum, New York entitled 'Abject Art: Repulsion and Desire in American Art.' It refers to the idea brought by the French writer Georges Battle (1897-1962) in the 1930's that modern artists were repelled by, but at the same time sacralized, things that are commonly rejected and despised in society, culture and the human body.
Best known for abject art is photographer Cindy Sherman. I wrote a nine page paper on her works and how her series begins with scenes of a beautiful, vulnerable woman, and later unravels into images of disgust with no woman present at all but rather what the woman left behind-Shit, vomit, mucus, and menstrual blood. It's awful. In her Untitled #175, 1987, Sherman uses abject to show what disturbs the subject (not present) and her identity. Here, there is a sense of transgression where operation has to take place. She focuses on "things you have to get rid of," reject or expel to reveal degraded things in society. Consider her work as a social subject-the people/individual we get rid of. What are the conditions of the repulsion? Politics? What are the dangers of the truth?
What I find most disturbing of Sherman's work in relation to art history, is that art indeed has always reflected its history. Could Sherman's work be telling us our reality today-that we are symbolically living in our own excretion? Corruption in politics, the economy, the media ect; needs to be expelled just like shit. What is today's fascination with disgust in art? We are in a decade of proliferation of these works, art that no longer expresses beauty but instead quite the opposite. And who are the sickos that appreciate this stuff? I could go into more detail of more awful art out there, but my little sister reads my blog. Let's just say it consists of artists doing private things in public spaces. Why do artists get away with this? As long as it takes place in a gallery it's not illegal, it's freedom of expression-a 1st Amendment guarantee. What these artists are doing makes Cindy Sherman's works appear pleasant-at least her's are just pictures of excretion rather than the actual action. At some point art institutes and critics need to draw the line- taking a shit on a gallery floor is not art because the artist claims it is and hides behind the 1st Amendment for protection.

St. Peter's, the Pope's Palace

2005-04-14T17:51:00.000-07:00

This is my second time posting this,so hopefully it works this time!
Last week, the world got to watch Pope John Paul II's funeral, a ceremony that took place in the vast Baroque splendor of St. Peters. Many people commented on the plainness of his casket, which did indeed contrast with the lavish setting of the basilica, the heart-aching hymns, and the fancy Swiss guards. Keep in mind Jesus himself was not given such a burial, so maybe the church was attempting to be modest with his casket.
This week I'd like to blog on the history of St. Peters basilica, which is supposedly the exact spot of St. Peters tomb. St. Peters is the home of not only the pope, but also great paintings and sculpture. Michelangelo famous fresco, the Last Judgment (1508) and Creation of Adam (1511) can be seen here, along with Rapheal's School of Athens (1509) in the Stanza della Signatura. And don't forget Bernini's great baldacchino (1624) which marks the exact spot of St. Peters tomb. This 100' high gilded bronze sculpture is magnificent!
Planning St. Peters began in 1505, with Bramante, who was commissioned by Julius II. Julius II's intent was to make the Rome of the popes reminiscent of the Rome of the ceasars. His plan consisted of a cross with arms of equal length, each ending with an apse. A large dome would have covered the crossing and smaller domes would have covered the diagonal axes. Unfortunately Bramante's plan was never executed before his death, so the great master Michelangelo stepped up to the plate in 1546, under Pope Paul III. With a few minor adjustments to Bramante's plan, Michelangelo executed the building with a form of organic beauty. The dome was completed by Giacomo Della Porta after Michelangelo's death, and is today probably the most impressive and beautiful in the world, influencing generations of architects in years following.
But wait, that's not all! St. Peter's also fell into the hands of yet another architect in (1606-1612), Carlo Maderno, commissioned by Pope Paul V. Maderno added a facade and three nave bays to the nucleus of the basilica. Critics claimed that Maderno's facade is too wide and the entry is too small, obstructing the view of the dome. He also lengthened the nave, pushing the dome further back from the facade and making the dome even harder to see. This longitudinal plan reinforced the symbolic distance between clergy and the city, while providing more space for processes of ever growing assemblies. When viewed at close range, the dome is barely visible due to this addition, which totally disrupts Michelangelo vision of a dominant dome.
And finally, Gianlorenzo Bernini is to thank for his contribution to St. Peters in 1656. Bernini added the courtyard, or piazza, complete with two sets of elongated colonnades that appear as welcoming arms. The artist's intent was for these two colonnades, made up of four rows of huge, Tuscan columns, was to symbolically embrace the people.

The Vatican is at the top of my list of places I want to visit. Once the center of the art world, the Vatican offers the best collections and architecture by the great masters. Although I never ventured to this small country during Pope John Paul II's leadership, I hope the Papal Palace I see will be occupied with a pope just as wonderful as his predecessor.

2005-04-06T21:33:00.000-07:00

Gordon Matta-Clark, Day's End, 1976. Exterior

2005-04-06T21:32:00.000-07:00

Gordon Matta-Clark, Day's End, 1976

Anarchitecture:an alternative attitude toward buildings

2005-04-04T13:39:00.000-07:00

Anarchitecture is an attack on architecture, the dissecting and cutting of derelict and abandoned buildings. Mainly it was a rebellion against the so-called New York Five, the five most prominent architects during the '70s.
Gordon Matta Clark (1943-1978), a young sculptor that worked under Robert Smithson, presented this art form in the show Idea as Model hosted by the Institute of architectural and Urban Studies, in 1976. Among the participants was the New York Five who clashed violently as his contribution took place. Matta-Clark's style of working was to cut away sections of walls and floors in existing buildings. This subtractive process was not authorized, Matta-Clark and his friends would scour the city for abandoned buildings in which to experiment. One could argue that his art was vandalism, but many in the art world agree that this was his 1st Amendment right to freedom of expression.
One of his works, Window Blowout, 1976, involved shooting out the windows of a housing project, in the Bronx, with a bebe gun. Although each of these windows were already cracked, the organizers of the show were horrified and the piece was eradicated by the end of the day, which ironically completed his vision of the work. The significance of this reckless action was the logic of urban destruction/vandalism. He used these failed housing projects in the Bronx as an example of his own activist concerns with housing conditions for the city's poor.
Perhaps a more dangerous form of this abstract modern architecture was Matta Clark's Day's End (Pier 52 New York) 1975. Here, he transformed a mammoth abandoned pier, in the meat packing district, into a radiant cathedral for the few who managed to see it before the police arrived to close down the event. The warehouse was abandoned in the '60s after people lost their jobs and before Matta-Clark's dangerous operation, gay men used the spot for "cruisin'." His concern with this property was real estate speculation. He described this mission as "making a mark in sad, lonely history," as it was a time between speculation and real estate opportunity. Today, this space is as busy as Time Square. Like Window Blowout, the activity was illegal, he had no license. He and his three assistants made their "contribution to a decaying city," by making five huge cuts into the the building, each were circular or ovalish, mimicking that of a rose window on a cathedral. These cuts provided a source of light, a great illumination, liberating it from its chilling darkness. This light is crucial in viewing the work, the work is named after the time of day the passage of light is most intense (Day's End). It was the artists intent that these perceptual voids would display the unknown, the abyss, an opposition to capitalist rationalism of urban planning.
My thoughts:
I think that Matta-Clark is fascinating. His defiance toward architecture is definitely unique-destroying rather than creating. However using a language of violence in art (cutting, dissecting, mutilating buildings), creates a level of uneasiness for the viewer. Matta-Clark proves that art does not have to be beautiful, instead it must be poetic, an expression of the artists beliefs. In his case, his need to capture the poverty of a city slowly decaying.
Although I appreciate his project, I have a hard time respecting his way of working- illegally. This was dangerous and irresponsible. He should have gotten permission to destroy these buildings through a license. They were abandoned, it probably wouldn't have been hard, and he might have received more acclaim in the process. Instead, he opted for the notion of the artist as the romantic outlaw, an outlaw whose project came to an end abruptly as he died of cancer two years later.

2005-03-30T14:41:00.000-08:00

Piero Della Francesca, Resurrection, Palazzo Comunale, Borgo San Sepolcro, Italy, 1463.

Resurrecting art from the early Renaissance

2005-03-30T13:55:00.000-08:00

"On the third day (Easter Sunday), Christ rises from the dead and leaves the tomb, while the guards are outside sleeping."-definition of the Resurrection in art. OK, so I know that this isn't very timely, but I decided to blog on the most famous depiction of the resurrection in painting, to honor the past holiday.
The painting:
Piero Della Francesca'a Resurrection (1463), is a fine example of the symmetrically perfect paintings that defined early Renaissance art. Like Masaccio's Holy Trinity, this fresco uses the compositional device- the figure triangle. To stabilize the composition, Piero arranged his figures into a triangle centrally placed in the painting. The risen Christ, standing with strength and an attitude of eternal triumph at the edge of his tomb, occupies the upper portion of the triangular arrangement, while the soldiers sleeping in the foreground make up the broad base of the shape. By dominating the picture's central axis, the triangular scheme gives the painting great compositional stability and is one of the keys to the symmetry and self sufficiency Renaissance artists strove for in their work. Here, Piero involved his audience in the composition by depicting the sleeping soldier at the lower right with his back to the viewers so that the figure occupies the same position (relative to Christ) as that of the spectators. Notice that the two groups of soldiers also make up smaller triangles. This composition not only provides geometric clarity, but it also symbolizes the Trinity- the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Piero's sophisticated handling of color also draws attention to Christ as the motif. The bright flesh, white banner, and pink mantle contrast sharply with the dark tones used for the sleeping soldiers in the foreground. Thus, both Piero's composition and palette focus viewers' attention immediately on the radiant haloed Christ. Also, Piero purposely depicted a half winter barren landscape with half brought back to life in the background, to provide the symbolic resurrection of springtime.
The Artist:
Piero Della Francesca (1420-1492) was one of the many early Renaissance artists to influence later Renaissance artists like Da Vinci, Michelangelo, and Titian. Piero, a skilled geometrician, believed that the highest beauty resides in forms that have the clarity and purity of geometric figures. Toward the end of his long career, Piero wrote the first theoretical treatise on systematic perspective. He received several commissions from Federico da Montefeltro, the well-known condottieri that accounted for Urbino's status as a center of Renaissance art and culture (the other was Cosimo de' Medici).
My Thoughts:
I love all Gothic and Renaissance Art! I wish that there were more artists like those of the past today. Although many contemporary artists argue that through painting, they are restricted to expressing themselves on a 2D picture plan, which they today liberate themselves from. Although this is not my favorite piece from its time, [Bosch's Garden of earthly Delights (1510) is], I am absolutely amazed at the theory involved in producing such masterpieces. One thing about this painting that remains a mystery to me is the meaning of the flag Christ holds. I know that it obviously symbolizes victory, but what else? Does it represent a place, family, or ruler? I have not yet found an art historian or book that can answer this question. Perhaps there is no meaning at all and it's just a generic flag.

I love you grandma

2005-03-24T23:13:00.000-08:00

No artist/art movement this week, I'm on Spring Break and The Panthers just lost. Damn, but I'm still very proud that we made it as far as we did!
Anyways, art is most often a visual expression of one's emotion. I have no visual to illustrate my feelings, but I would like to express my gratitute toward my Grandma Jean "The Lucky Grandma" for her kindness and generousity. Truly, there is no painting or sculpture more beautiful than the love you provide to your children and grandchildren. Even Da Vinci could not render the beauty of your heart. Thank you grandma, I love you! (and Chris too!)

Don't eat yellow snow, embrace it for all its beauty

2005-03-16T16:34:00.000-08:00

Just when I thought art has reached its highest level of absurdity, I was wrong. Apparently, in Milwaukee artists are turning snow into a canvas, and using their urine as the medium. YUCK! This just shows how deprived Milwaukee artists are of warm weather, if they have to resort to this. What about ice skates, can't we find art in the marks that ice skates leave behind in the ice? Mike Breener, the director of Hotcakes, a contemporary fine arts gallery, presented the exhibition, "Yellow Snow," yesterday. Seven artists participated, one of which is from Austria. Their images ranged from cats/dog to stars to a more abstract expression of circles that are reminiscent of the Spiral Jetty. Surely writing your name in the snow is too conventional for these artists that have a larger vision of animals and swirls. Where's the political message, is there any iconography present? No, Brenner claims that its just art for fun. Ladifrickindah!
And another thing, this artform is sexist! I, being a female, could not possibly attempt such a masterpiece. Surprisingly enough, there were two women in the exhibition, obviously two very talented women, that know something that I don't.
Breener was inspired one cold winter day while walking his dog, how sweet. I wonder where this exhibition would have gone if the dog would have taken a dump.
Check out the exhibition and a related news article:
http://www.hotcakesgallery.com/yellow-snow/
http://www.mkeonline.com/story.asp?id=307767

2005-03-08T21:34:00.000-08:00

Serra, Richard. Tilted Arc, 1981

2005-03-08T21:30:00.000-08:00

Christo and Jeanne-Claude.The Gates, Central Park, New York. 1979-2005

Site Specific Art in Public Space

2005-03-08T19:35:00.000-08:00

The Gates
Last month Central Park in New York City was complete with 7,500 fabric panels making up what looked like a golden river that flowed in the wind, through the park. Today it is gone.
The Gates (1979-2005) by Christo and Jeanne-Claude, is one site-specific work that created an uproar among New Yorkers. The work was either thought of as an artistic triumph, or a waste of time, moey and resources. The fabrication of materials began back in 1979, and the installation was not complete until Feb. 12trh, only to be dismantled sixteen days later. It then was passed off as new project for New York's recycling plant. Although the project was finished solely by C.J.V Corp., The Gates occupied the public space of Central Park, making the sculpture open to critism not only by art critics and other artists, but by the general public as well. This type of art, art in public space, forces the general public the view the sculpture and become a critic, rather than the conventional way of viewing art- purchasing a general admission ticket to the local museum/gallery. Although many were upset about the short-lived life of The Gates, I thought it added to the piece. By leaving it up for only sixteen days, it created controversy and made it more intriguing, thus attracting a larger audience and possibly making that audience appreciate the work much more. However, by dismantling the work so soon Christo and Jeanne-Claude may have lost a trademark that could have made them legendary in art history- well who knows, it could have even given them a name among such site-specific artists as Nancy Holdt, Robert Smithson, Michael Heizer and...........

Richard Serra, sculptor of Tilted Arc
Perhaps the most controversial of American artists, Richard Serra brought a $30 million lawsuit to the U.S. defending his signature piece, Tilted Arc, 1981. The contentious work was removed form its public space, the Federal Plaza in New York in 1989, after years of public plea for its removal. The gentle- curving sheet, commissioned by the federal government, was immense in scale, 120 feet long and 12 ft high. Serra wanted his work to be placed where people wouldn't miss it, and so he succeeded, as many thought the placement sucked, it disrupted the site as they were forced to walk around the huge sculpture. Many thought it was too overbearing, and were threatened by its leaning position, which looks ready to topple over. What is more, people argued that it blocked their walking space, and the tarnish and rust was an eyesore.
Those in favor of preserving the site argued that people didn't even use the space anyways because the fountain near the sculpture sprayed walker-bys. After years of debate and a lengthy court battle, Tilted Arc was taken from it's public space, and Serra to this day remains bitter that his sculpture was scraped by the same government that commissioned it.
My thoughts:
I think that the piece was hideous and I would have wanted its removal on the basis of its awful appearance and its awkward location in the plaza. By placing art in public space, the artist is giving up his/her ownership- to the public, and opening themselves up to vast critism. If the artist cannot take negative criticsm, like Serra, perhaps they should not attempt to reach such a large audience, especially a public audience. Such a general audience is dangerous for an artist showcasing his/her work, as most do not understand the fundamentals of modern art, therefore could hardly appreciate anything short of beautiful.

2005-03-06T12:09:00.000-08:00

The Great Salt Lake, Utah

2005-03-06T12:08:00.000-08:00

Robert Smithson, Spiral Jetty, 1970

Site Specific Art

2005-03-03T18:02:00.000-08:00

Site specificity in art was more a genre than a movement during the late '60s- early 70s'. This type of art took the actual site of an actual physical location. It established an individual relationship between the object and the site as the sculpture gives itself up to its environmental surroundings. This was extremely innovative as art was now removed from the gallery to remote locations. A lot of times the art would be destroyed as it was often part of the earth either to be washed away, blown away, or eroded away. Site specific art meant that it was no longer something that you could purchase of take home with you, but rather it was intangible, only attainable from a distance. As Robert Smithson puts it: "One's mind and the earth are in a constant state of erosion, mental rivers wear away abstract banks, brain waves undermine cliffs of thought, ideas decompose into stones of unknowing, and conceptual crystallizing break apart into deposits of gritty reason."
Robert Smithson's Spiral Jetty, 1970.
Perhaps the best known example of site-specific art, or earth art is Robert Smithson's Spiral Jetty located in Great Salt Lake, Utah. This water coil, made up of mud, precipitated salt crystals and rocks, is 1500 ft long and 15 ft wide. The coil can only be viewed from groundlevel if the lake elevation is no higher than 4,197 ft. This monumental piece was partly inspired by a Pre-Columbian Indian monument in SW Ohio. It is also a portrayal of the great myth that there is an enormous whirlpool in the Great Salt Lake. Smithson used untraditional art materials such as language, maps, dumptrucks, mirrors, contractors and earth to produce such status-quo defied works as The Spiral Jetty.
My opinion: I love the work! I think that Smithson's break from conventional sculpture is magnificent. The Spiral Jetty appears to be as natural as the sunset on the lake. It adds beauty to the already breathtaking site if which it is placed. Other site-specific artists, however I could do without, specifically Richard Serra, whom was responsible for the horrid Tilted Arc, 1979, which I will blog more about next week.

2005-02-22T21:34:00.000-08:00

DuChamp, Marcel. The Fountain. 1917.

2005-02-22T21:33:00.000-08:00

Johns, Jasper. The Critic Sees. 1963

The Concept of Conceptual Art

2005-02-22T20:11:00.000-08:00

Conceptual art was a movement made up of an ingenious group of artists that worked closely together but were extremely diverse, and often times worked opposite of one another. The conceptual art phenomenon lasted an entire decade in the '60s, and was composed of such artists as Dan Graham, Joseph Kosuth, Christine Kozlov, and Lawrence Weiner. Although these artists were extremely diverse, they met common ground in what Henry Flint first coined as "concept art" in 1961. He described it as an art of which material is language. An art in which the ideal/concept is the most important part of the work, not the materials used. This emphasis on the idea provides a deemphasizing on the visual aesthetic and instead turns to language as the material /medium.
This idea is derived from Dada, a popular art movement of the early 20th century that first challenged the meaning of art. Of the Dada artists, Marcel DuChamp was the most influencing with his famous piece The Fountain, (1917). This work was an example of a ready-made, a usable/functional object that was taken out of it's original context, deprived of it's original function, and turned into art. In this case, it was a urinal taken out of the bathroom, and hung on a gallery wall complete with DuCahmp's signature.

Johns, Jasper. The Critic Sees. 1964.
This is an excellent example of conceptual art, as Johns addresses the subject of perception through this linguistic piece. He replaces the eyes behind a pair of glasses with two talking mouths providing a visual pun of the art world. By making mouths and eyes equivalent, Johns suggests that it doesn't matter what the artist is saying because the voice of a critic is much louder than the intended meaning of the piece. The box-like structure implies that there are many limitations on perception. The experience in this work, its attention to language, and the displacement of the art is the main idea- it's the concept of the art, hence, it's conceptual art.

What do I think?
I think that this piece specifically by Johns is a great piece of conceptual art. Not only does it prove that Johns is a talented sculptor, but it is also shows how creative he is. If conceptual art is meant to be that of a language than this is a fine example, as his message is clear in The Critic Sees, that it no longer matters what the artist's perception is, but rather that of the critics, for eyes are turned into talking mouths. Although I enjoy the work of Johns, other conceptual artists I have no taste for. For example Edward Ruscha and many others used social reference and typology as their linguistic, dematerialization of art. In Ruscha's work, 26 Gasoline Stations, he simply photographed 26 gas stations along Route 66 and identified each with a caption underneath and made it for mass distribution, calling it art. This is a nonstatement with no style and frankly, an unsuccessful attempt to copy DuChamp's idea of the ready-made. This is where conceptual art is bad, when it lacks the talent and creativity that Johns emulated in his piece.

2005-02-17T20:35:00.000-08:00

Warhol, Andy. Marilyn Monroe Diptych (1962).

2005-02-17T20:24:00.000-08:00

This is another oil on canvas, by me. It is the suns etting on Tichigan Lake, my hometown.

2005-02-17T20:21:00.000-08:00

This is a self-portrait inspired by a photo my grandpa took of me when I was only 3. I was picking flowers in a field somewhere in Escanaba, Michigan, where I am from. It is an oil on canvas with weeds and blades of grass gessoed onto the canvas.

2005-02-17T19:56:00.000-08:00

Here I am, YIKES!

"I want to be a machine"

2005-02-17T17:41:00.000-08:00

And a machine he was. Andy Warhol was the leading pop artist during the 1960's. During a time of post-war consumer's cultures, Warhol and his work simulates a seriality of mass production and consumption. He actually owned factories and had people replicating his work onto silkscreens where he would sign the end product. His works were highly impersonal and cold. His famous Campbell's Soup cans and Marilyn Monroe diptychs depicted art as a product. What Warhol was doing with his works was making an exchange between low art and high culture. Warhol's style was truly a reflection of his time.
What do I think? I really don't care for Warhol. I see no art in the manufacturing of everyday objects. Sure, the thought process is deep, but to look at one of his thousands of Campbell Soup cans he did, is very tiresome. So what? Oh poor little gay, Andy Warhol, living in a consumer society. No one understood him in his pre-Stonewell days, so he was forced to make his audience suffer by pumping out boreing art in an assembly-line situation. Even going to the extreme of making people produce it for him. I think that the great masters would turn in their graves if they saw what this man did to art.
Marilyn Monroe Diptych (1962) This silkscreen of Marilyn is an expression of iconic images as a mass product. She is cultural figure of mass commodity. By referring to her over and over again, Warhol's approach simulates a machine- an aesthetic with the photo-silkscreen. There is also a communication of absence and presence involved, as the repeated images smudge and fade out. This painting was released after her death, therefore it could also be a reference to her highly profiled life that was short lived.

Introduction

2005-02-17T17:01:00.000-08:00

Hello,
My name is Maureen Mayrand, I am a student at UW-Milwaukee, enrolled in the College of Letters and Science. My nickname is Mo' Beans, a ghetto form of its original "More Beans." Cute hey? Not really when everyone assumes that you have a flatulence problem. Allow me to clarify. Roughly four years ago, while I was in the shower, my little sister Melanie was yelling for my mom to serve her "More Beans" during dinner. From the shower I responded, thinking that she was calling me, Maureen. Finding much humor in my response, Melanie continued to yell "more beans," until I became angry and rushed out of the shower to see what she wanted. "I just wanted more beans," she said. It wasn't long before I was known as "More Beans"or "Mo' B" to all my classmates, coworkers, and customers. Lucky me.
Nicknames suck because one has no control over what they may be called, and often times they are insulting, affiliated with one's race, religion, sexual orientation or physical appearance. For example, people call my brother "Dopey" because he always looks stoned (he's not), I have a friend Mike, that is known as "Diva" because he is gay, and lastly I know a guy only by the name "Ho' Chunk" because he looks like a big, fat Native American (he's actually half Japanese).