Author Archives: Tereza Koniakovska - Bors

Blog post # 5

As a sonic example, I chose two records. One is from Queen’s live concert, and the second one is the studio record of the same song, the same band. As we have learned from the Krukowski’s podcasts, the sound and its perception are also affected by the space. Even if both of the video examples are kind of reproduction, I believe that the difference is clear. In a live concert, we can see people sharing and enjoying the moment together. Freddie Mercury is communicating with the audience and getting feedback from them, which is creating a breathtaking and magical ambiance. In the second record, we can hear the very same song much clearly, without any unwanted noises, perfectly understand all the words precisely, enjoy the listening of all the instruments. The studio recording is a much better quality of the music, technically speaking. Yet, people that are listening to the studio record can’t have the same, unforgettable experience full of emotions that are written down into their memory as the audience at the live concert had.

Queen – Love of My Life

Wembley, ’86.

Love Of My Life

Provided to YouTube by Universal Music Group Love Of My Life · Queen A Night At The Opera ℗ 1975 Hollywood Records, Inc. Released on: 1991-01-01 Producer: Ro…

Discussion questions # 7

Episode 5

Question # 1:
I believe Krukowski wanted to point out that we are naturally affected by music, but the question is if the choice of music is also natural. Big companies like Amazon, Google, Spotify, or other online music servers, serve us all sources of information irresponsibly and are using cookies or other practices to provide or unobtrusively intrude to us the music they wanted to based on whatever is currently most popular or seemingly wanted. That is why are some bands or records pushed aside – marginalized. Then the choice of music we listen to is often affected and not natural. Walking into some store with music doesn’t have to be than just snobbish habits of nowadays, but also our diligence in getting the natural and responsible flow of information and so to form our personalities and opinions.

Question # 2:
Forced Exposure means listening to the opinion of those who listened to all of the available records and wrote about them. People picked what they wanted to listen to based on this information. In contrast, Spotify is choosing for us a source of music based on our listening history by using the algorithms.

Question # 3:
There are algorithms on the internet that are helping us to find precisely what we are looking for. That means no surprises. Spotify is offering the music based on our taste and definitely won’t surprise us with some new kind of music that is not resonating with our current listening history. It is crucial to be aware of that because even Spotify is an efficient tool, it can impoverish our discoveries or experiences. Discovering music can, on the other hand, be very surprising and bring us something new, unexpected, and exciting.

Episode 6

Question # 1:
The signal is one part of the sound on which is our hearing apparatus concentrating at the specific moment the most. Noise is considered all the other sounds going on around, which we don’t care about at the moment. These sounds can be manipulated in the recording studio, by removing all the unwanted noises and adding loudness to these that are chosen as the signal.

Question # 2:
Even the sound considered as noise can be essential in order to get the right impression from music. Manipulation of the sounds in the record studios can be very beneficial to us to listen to the noises of music clearly and as a part of the production.

Question # 3:
In all the episodes, including the one about the noise, are finding out what impact has the digital technologies on our hearing, sensing of sounds and music, and also its impact on our society. Digital technologies are adjusting the sound we are receiving or helping us to avoid what we don’t want to listen at all. Our perception of sound is changed and much less natural. The episodes are exploring these differences and the questions if it is a good or bad thing. We might get more clear sound, but in the end, the digitalized music is already some kind of reproduction, and in my opinion, it will never be the same as the live experience. Also, from all of the episodes, I got the expression that digital and modern technologies are dividing us from each other and creating more distance.

Discussion questions # 6

Question # 1:

The microphone provides more authentic experience for the listener, mainly thanks to the sounds in the background and all aspects of the individual voice or environment. The digital transmitting of the voice thru the cell phone is cutting off all nuances of the voice, same as the other sounds, voices, etc. that are happening around us. The microphone allows the speaker to present the mood, exact color of the voice, nuances naturally recognized in the voice as the energy of the person who is talking into the mike. The main purpose of the cell phone is just transmission of the voice without any disturbing elements as clear as possible, only as of the communication canal on very fundamental basics, helping just to understand the message as clearly as it is possible.

Question # 2:

The musical qualities of the voice are even about all the imperfections which are adding extra special value to the voice. Concentration on the tone of the voice and listening deeply, trying to read between the lines and learn more about the speaker. Not only words are important to understand everything. It is one of the natural abilities of the human to use music as a language. Digital transmission is concentrating on the message and clear grammar throughout the far distances. But it’s missing the personal quality and the sense of connection.

Question # 3:

We can listen to the voices or music across the world thru digital transmission. But even it is a very practical and significant possibility, there is still a huge difference if you connect with people and can communicate in person. The emotions, extra feelings that we can experience during live communications are unique and noninterchangeable because they easily transmit to our memories and cooperating with our other senses.

Question # 4:
I think that the digital sharing of musical files is all right. It is a different experience than the live concert, which is usually very expensive. I had the chance to listen to the Czech symphonic orchestra playing in the theater live, but when I listened to the very same thing online, it was never the same experience. I want to say by this, that without the internet, I would have not even idea what the classic music is about or if I want to hear it alive, pay for the concert and share the moment. That is why I think that sharing music digitally could be beneficial for the listeners and the artists as well.

Question # 5:
The music itself is a very important part of our lives. We could have always communicated thru music. In the past, when the languages were not developed yet, and today we can introduce or communicate the different cultures or opinions between each other and thanks to the digital world even across the entire world. Music is connecting people on the multi-sensual level, creating memories, expressing different ideas, opinions, and idealism. It is a big question, if sharing musical files should be charged or not, in the end, I think it should be up to the artists individually.

Blog Post #4

As a sonic example, I picked the video, where just based on the visual part, we can not ostensibly see anything really special. But if we turn on the sound of the video, we can hear the clapping of people, which pay the tribute to all the essential workers, especially medical workers in New York City during the Corona-virus pandemic. I think that even the small, personal gadget like is headsets and listening to some music could manipulate all perception of walking down the street and steal from us such a surreal moment when all the people were connected by the current situation and were captured in the presence. Probably each of us, who heard that clapping, realized that we are all here for each other and we felt the connection with strangers, which is so rare nowadays. It was a scary time, especially at the beginning of the pandemic, when nobody knew what is going to happen next. But at that time, we were all together showing and sharing compassion, humbleness, and appreciation to those, who were risking their own life every single day. This is probably an extreme example of the possible manipulation of the moment by the different sounds coming into our ears. But maybe it is a good example to better realize, how differently we can see the world by spacing out from the presence by using modern technology in general.

7PM Clapping for NYC Essential Workers at Mount Sinai Hospital (April 7, 2020)

FDNY and New Yorkers at the Mount Sinai Hospital of Queens clap for essential workers during the Coronavirus Pandemic 2020. Filmed April 7, 2020 at 7:00PM Su…

Discussion Questions #5

Ways of Hearing, Episode 1 & 2

Question #1:
The significant difference between experiencing the real world versus the digital time is related to space and time. If we are experiencing the real world, we are in the present moment, part of what is happening around us. In NYC, for instance, we can hear walking people, somebody talking, cars passing by, beeping of cars, barking dogs, etc. We can experience the moment and its atmosphere, the energy of the short while, including sharing the ambiance with people around us, feeling, and sensing similar sentiments. On the other hand, the digital time is practically locking us into our bubbles. We are distanced from the sound and the real energy of the environment. Thanks to the digital gadgets we can manipulate the atmosphere, and drown the real sound with some other, which is better fitting our imagination about the possible sounds of the current environment. Thanks to the digital world, we can adjust the atmosphere to feel better at the moment, but at the same time, losing the authenticity of the sharing of space and time with others.

Question #2:
I think that Krukowski wanted to say that listening to what is going on around us is very important. We can sense the energy of the space base on the sounds as well. We are not listening to our environment, and we are losing real connection with space. For example, if we walk down the streets with headsets on, we won’t hear the beeping car or shouting person, or possibly even something positive, what could attract our attention.

Question #3:
They were talking about public space today and back in the ’70s. And about the difference between how New Yorkers could use all the public space today and how it was back in time. In the ’70s, public space was for everybody and free expression of oneself. People were, for example, skateboarding on the street and a little further along the way, there was a street band. People could use public space as they pleased. That’s how New York and its public spaces were and how they were used. Today, if anybody will try to do something like that, they will be probably noticed by a security guy from some of the stores around and will be asked to go away, like, for instance, at the Astor Place. Today, we can use only specific places for specific activities and we are told where we can do certain things. The freedom of expression is, in a way, almost gone.

Question #4:
Concert halls were developed and designed for the sound distance from the street/city sounds to be able to hear the music or actors. It was isolation for better sound. Thanks to these halls, we created space, where we can enjoy the not interrupted music. But the earplugs are creating our own space in our heads. It is a different dimension. Earplugs are providing the space free of the noises, but also free of other people and are robbing us of the shared experience with all the other possible sounds added to the memories.

Question #6:
I think the key ideas were related to the fact, that by creating a personal bubble around ourselves by listening to some of the music in our earplugs, we have different sensing of the specific space or happening around us. The picture of our surroundings could be manipulated by the music, that we are listening to in our earplugs. If I imagine watching the streets of NYC while listening to some death metal music, it will create a different memory about the city then if I would listen, for example, Frank Sinatra or just the city sounds itself. But what is important the most is that we are more stalled from the natural environment and our instincts by this, and it is having a bigger impact on us. We don’t know how to socialize as we used to. We share fewer experiences, we don’t talk to strangers, hence we are losing a chance to get some nice memories and interactions. In the end, our experience of life is unnecessarily impoverished.

Discussion Questions #4

Question #1:
Customers are influenced by advertising because they are surrounded by them everywhere they go. All kind of these images are an integral part of our lives and that is why is practically impossible to completely avoid them. We are swallowed by the commercials, and all of those images are stimulating our imagination. Propagation of the product appeals and concentrates on the viewers’ ego. The purpose of the modern way of how we perceive the pictures is to make us believe, that if we get a specific product, not only we could become better people, but we will become the most precious pleasure of the company/society. The only thing we have to do is spend our money and possessed the goods, but that is very misleading and false.

Question #2:
In the old oil paintings, there wasn’t a pictured way, how the person achieved the success or assets. It was rather a celebration of already achieved success. According to Berger, advertising is promoting the product itself but in some desired context of life to attract a buyer. It is very important because many of us unconsciously believe, that by buying the advertised product we buy the acceptance of society as well as a certain lifestyle. I think that nowadays we think success is mainly about possessing some goods and that is not good.

Question #3
A good example of what Berger used was skin. By purchasing promoted products, we are not going to look more beautiful, as it is pictured in the commercials. But many people are imagining, that by buying and using that product their skin and also themselves, will become more desirable and in the center of the attention of others. They believe they will become more popular. But unfortunately, they just became manipulated by the nice pictures.

Blog post #3

1. Is the purpose of the essay to educate, announce, entertain, or persuade?

The purpose of the essay is to educate and maybe even persuade students not to worry, but rather follow the rules and do certain prewriting activities that can make a huge difference and help out in writing an essay on an academic level.

2. Who might be interested in the topic of the essay?

All the students that are not sure about their writing skills and would like to learn how to better develop their ideas, be able to write a college-level essay and avoid common mistakes by implementing advice mentioned in the essay.

3. Who would be impacted by the essay or the information within it?

Especially all the students, or any other person, who can somehow relate themself to the story, or the story is related to the reader’s interests.

4. What does the reader know about this topic?

It is related to our assignment. The writing process is a very important part if we want to develop and present our ideas in a satisfying structure.

5. What does the reader need to know in order to understand the essay’s points?

Very important is to know the topic and purpose of the essay. The vocabulary related to the subject could be crucial.

6. What kind of hook is necessary to engage the readers and their interests?

Important is to write catching opening paragraph. Writers should also concern who exactly is going to read their essay and try to related to them, for instance by using appropriate language or a tone of the essay.

7. What level of language is required? Words that are too subject-specific may make the writing difficult to grasp for readers unfamiliar with the topic.

Language should be on the academic level but using words that don’t have a double meaning and make full sense in the way how they are used. Avoiding using words usually used in expertise could be also helpful, especially if the reader is not familiarized with them.

8. What is an appropriate tone for the topic? A humorous tone that is suitable for an autobiographical, narrative essay may not work for a more serious, persuasive essay.

The tone of the topic should be carefully picked, closely related, and chosen based on the theme, sort of potential readers, and willful approach of the writer towards the problematics.


Probably each of us has found oneself at the moment when experiencing some difficulties in writing the first paragraph of our essay. Sometimes, it is very difficult to pointedly introduce the topic to the reader, suggest the tone of the essay, or reveal the attitude towards the topic and connecting all that to the body paragraphs. Understanding why are these and other specifics significant, what is their actual purpose, and how to create such an introductory is detailed explained in the article “Opening paragraphs”. The article is bringing up many important and helpful tactics that we can use to deliver a satisfactory beginning of our academic essay.

Discussion questions #3

Question #1

The importance of the difference is about the perception of the nudity of the pictured women. Are we looking at them as at the sexual objects or the objects to be judged? Or, on the contrary, are we looking at naked women as at them, just for their simple being, without any male interference or interest and judgment? In my opinion, these differences apply to images of today’s western society in a very similar way as back then. Ladies are in an all-source of media often presented as an object, in position to try to catch the attention by the visual perception by looking submissive, available, and ready.

Question #2

The role of the women depicted as a beautiful thing to look at, whose biggest interest is to be pretty for the men. Women were just sexual objects, which were even more attractive if they were submissive without their own opinion, quietly following the men’s demands. The position of women in modern society is more and more equal to the position of men, but we can still see many situations nowadays where are the same old rules still applied. For instance, magazines or photos on social media are presenting women’s nudity without any artistic relevance, or intellectual overlap. Even some very intelligent, successful women still believe that they are not fully accepted by society without positive judgment of their physical beauty by men.

Question #3

The beauty of women was ranked by interest and judgment of men’s enjoyment. Women at the paintings were looking at themselves in the mirror, thinking about how they look and how they are looking at by men. Mirror was also used as a symbol of the vanity of women. The hypocrisy of the men was hidden behind the moral condemn of the women for their vanity in order just to look at the naked women’s body. We can see a kind of parallel between the women naked bodies pictured in old paintings and photos of naked women in every other magazine today. Women are often seeing as a sexual object without any other interest than to be pretty and accepted by men.


Blog post #2

As an example of how duplication or photocopying can manipulate the original meaning, I could have chosen some commercial, maybe even some of the publications of mainstream media, which are manipulating the truth and reality by reproduction or just using a small part of the photographs/videos. Propaganda, conspiracies, fake news, manipulation by fear, but even the filtered pictures on social media. Artificial intelligence and personalized commercials processed by experts, and psychologists, convincing us to believe that our lives are not fulfilled until we get the specific product. Reportages on the same topic are usually divergent, and what matters is the side motivation of the presenter more than some codex of the profession. All that by also using well-know art pieces that can catch the attention of the buyer. But additionally, thanks to the invention of the camera, it is sometimes very difficult to find out where is the actual truth. That all is probably one of the biggest problems of reproduction and manipulation and the most dangerous features of the new century.
Therefore, I rather decided to use something more positive. At the websites of Judit Szeifert (, who is among other things, Hungarian art historian, I found the group of manipulated art pieces into memes in the context of humor, a manifestation of nowadays time, pop-culture, and contemporary art. (See the pictures below the text). These pictures are exemplarily presenting the importance of factors surrounding the art piece, and in some cases even changing the entire meaning by adding just one object to the perspective.
When I saw these pictures for the first time, my reaction was actually very positive. I laughed at them and had thought about them as funny replications, connecting the art, times, and humor. But not all of the viewers would, most likely, think about these memes as humorous and someone could even consider some of the concepts are barbarous, destroying our art heritage, degrading our society, or being offensive.
These memes are unmistakably manipulating the unique artworks. Brutally changing the circumstances, manipulating the perception of the viewers, changing the entire context, original meanings, and sending out different messages than was the primal purpose of the artists.
Despite all, I believe there is also positiveness about them as well. For instance, some of these “jokes” may require a need for a bit of knowledge to understand the meaning. We can also consider all collection as a progressive way how to approach the young generation and wake up in it the interest in art and general education more often than not.
These memes are transmitting a satiric message which is positive. But as Berger said in the video, reproduction can be positive and also negative. In the end, we should be careful and always think about what is “behind the curtain”.






Discussion question #2

Question #1

The origin of the reason for seeing some art pieces, that we can see in galleries nowadays, were related to the habits and conventions of back then society. I liked the example Berger used, concerning the art pieces as an integral part of an architectural structure. In particular, the renaissance church and its icon. The atmosphere and surroundings were closely corresponding with the artwork. Thereby the viewer could perceive the overlap of perception in addition. Nowadays, people are rather appreciating the beauty, craft, or the enormous historic and preservational value of the art. I perceived the video as the motivation that we should think about the meaning of things in general. To learn to analyze and be able to recognize the real meaning of everything around us to avoid preoccupation and bias.

Question #2

Before the invention of the camera, we had to travel to see a certain art piece to a specific place. The camera switched this necessity and so today, we can see any art piece at any time and any place in the world. We can reproduce any paintings and bring them to society thru screens or magazines. But to see the paintings on a monitor or in a book is influenced by the context of our lives and the other objects placed around. Seeing the artwork in stillness and silence can help us to feel the present moment and appreciate the artwork. It helps us to feel the importance and meaning of art by a minimally interrupted sense of personal perception.

Question #3

The uniqueness of paintings in the context of space and meaning were relegated to secondary status. Paintings became transmittable and gained rather informational and financial importance. If I would paraphrase idea: “talking with reproduction”, I would say that reproduction of art can be adjusted to fit the desired context without any additional words needed. Context is always crucial in a sense of meaning. The meaning of the paintings can be easily manipulated and that is why we have to be aware of potential danger to not get manipulated as well.