About the Assemblage Box
During the course of the Revolution project students worked in pairs to create an assemblage box that artistically depicted the revolution they studied, in addition to French revolution which we studied as a whole class. I worked alone on my project because it gave me more artistic freedom, which is always very important to me. A picture of my assemblage box is shown above and my artist statements are below.
Cypress Ellen
American, 1996
Wasted Value, 2012
Wood, Paper, Polyester, Seaglass, Rock, Metal, Rhinestones, Wine, Soil.
My piece is representing how Absolutist ideas and values infiltrated Russian culture. Pages from a French memoir block light from seeping through the box, and spill out from inside half a Russian doll. A small Russian doll is resting on top of jewelry inside a much larger doll. This is to represent class disparity between the rich and poor. I chose to leave space by not completing the back to the box. This gave the appearance of a crate. To aid this illusion, the wood has a rough texture and looks old and worn. The pages of the memoir are ripped and stained. They take some of the space left by the missing panels in the box. The colors in the ribbons contrast each other, with blue and green on one side, and burgundy on the other. The significance of the contrast is to make the Russian doll more obvious, and hide the key which already has a darker backdrop.
American, 1996
Wasted Value, 2012
Wood, Paper, Polyester, Seaglass, Rock, Metal, Rhinestones, Wine, Soil.
My piece is representing how Absolutist ideas and values infiltrated Russian culture. Pages from a French memoir block light from seeping through the box, and spill out from inside half a Russian doll. A small Russian doll is resting on top of jewelry inside a much larger doll. This is to represent class disparity between the rich and poor. I chose to leave space by not completing the back to the box. This gave the appearance of a crate. To aid this illusion, the wood has a rough texture and looks old and worn. The pages of the memoir are ripped and stained. They take some of the space left by the missing panels in the box. The colors in the ribbons contrast each other, with blue and green on one side, and burgundy on the other. The significance of the contrast is to make the Russian doll more obvious, and hide the key which already has a darker backdrop.
Wasted Value
Cypress Ellen
Artist’s Statement; Assemblage Box
Humanities
11/4/12
My assemblage box represents a crossover between the Russian Revolution and the French Revolution.
The box itself, is made to represent a crate, is reminiscent of something that might carry food, or other basic supplies. This is to give the viewer the mindset of looking into a box that should hold food, but doesn’t. It is inlaid on the top half with scraps of a memoir written in French. The word blood is written atop that in a combination of wine and soil. This is done in reference to A Tale Of Two Cities where a peasant writes the word blood on a wall, using wine that has spilled on the ground. Blood in this case is a call to the people of France to take revenge on the nobles, specifically by killing them. A blank key hangs from a ribbon on the top right corner. This refers to the novel Revolution, in which the main character wears a key around her neck. A key means many things, but it is meant to serve as a solution. A tool that can unlock whatever you need it to. The bottom half of a Russian doll is filled with lace and jewels and the smallest russian doll sits atop them. The overall image is representing how the minority had control over the majority. The jewelry represents wealth, but also the fact that the Romanov daughters hid jewelry in their clothing before they were to be shot down. Because of this the bullets bounced off of them. The upper half of the Russian doll is also inlaid with scraps of the French memoir, and then stuffed with folded pieces of the memoir. This represents the French influence in Russia, and how it was like a frivolous decoration atop Russia’s rich culture. The blue and green ribbon in the upper left corner hold a medium sized Russian doll. It is suspended with minimal support and leaning on its side. It is there to show suspense before a fall in Russian history.
I chose materials based on their availability and the feeling they gave me. Many things I chose to use, I was simply drawn to without complete explanation. Similarly I arranged my items based on the feelings that I think of alongs side revolutions.
I chose to leave space by not completing the back to the box. This gave the appearance of a crate. To aid this illusion, the wood has a rough texture and looks old and worn. The pages of the memoir are ripped and stained. They take some of the space left by the missing panels in the box. The colors in the ribbons contrast each other, with blue and green on one side, and burgundy on the other. The significance of the contrast is to make the Russian doll more obvious, and hide the key which already has a darker backdrop.
Artist’s Statement; Assemblage Box
Humanities
11/4/12
My assemblage box represents a crossover between the Russian Revolution and the French Revolution.
The box itself, is made to represent a crate, is reminiscent of something that might carry food, or other basic supplies. This is to give the viewer the mindset of looking into a box that should hold food, but doesn’t. It is inlaid on the top half with scraps of a memoir written in French. The word blood is written atop that in a combination of wine and soil. This is done in reference to A Tale Of Two Cities where a peasant writes the word blood on a wall, using wine that has spilled on the ground. Blood in this case is a call to the people of France to take revenge on the nobles, specifically by killing them. A blank key hangs from a ribbon on the top right corner. This refers to the novel Revolution, in which the main character wears a key around her neck. A key means many things, but it is meant to serve as a solution. A tool that can unlock whatever you need it to. The bottom half of a Russian doll is filled with lace and jewels and the smallest russian doll sits atop them. The overall image is representing how the minority had control over the majority. The jewelry represents wealth, but also the fact that the Romanov daughters hid jewelry in their clothing before they were to be shot down. Because of this the bullets bounced off of them. The upper half of the Russian doll is also inlaid with scraps of the French memoir, and then stuffed with folded pieces of the memoir. This represents the French influence in Russia, and how it was like a frivolous decoration atop Russia’s rich culture. The blue and green ribbon in the upper left corner hold a medium sized Russian doll. It is suspended with minimal support and leaning on its side. It is there to show suspense before a fall in Russian history.
I chose materials based on their availability and the feeling they gave me. Many things I chose to use, I was simply drawn to without complete explanation. Similarly I arranged my items based on the feelings that I think of alongs side revolutions.
I chose to leave space by not completing the back to the box. This gave the appearance of a crate. To aid this illusion, the wood has a rough texture and looks old and worn. The pages of the memoir are ripped and stained. They take some of the space left by the missing panels in the box. The colors in the ribbons contrast each other, with blue and green on one side, and burgundy on the other. The significance of the contrast is to make the Russian doll more obvious, and hide the key which already has a darker backdrop.
News Script
The second major component of our French revolution project was a mock news cast comparing the French revolution and another revolution we studied in small groups. I and three others studied the Russian Revolution. I created a script which they acted and we had performed at a celebration of learning event. Below you can find the script and a link to the video of our news cast.
Tack it Back: News Report Script
Transcript For Russian Revolution Report
Camden : Hello and welcome to Contemporary Timelines, the best trans-timeline news in the spacetime continuum. Momentarily we’ll be looking at some of the influences seen in revolutions and the patterns that have brought us to the future, present and past.
To start, it helps to recognize the fact that through chrononaut technology we have come to understand that revolutions have intercepted nearly every era without exception. So what can we learn from the patterns in our timeline? Maelily is reporting live from 1917, Russia.
Maelily: Thank you Camden.
The time is 1917, right around October. Future historians will call this period the October Revolution, and the revolution that preceded it, the February Revolution. These two revolutions took place in the same year, but were quite different.
The February revolution displayed violent acts and much more desperation, but only elicited the abdication of Nicholas II. It was a motion put forth by the majority of Russia’s population who had suffered under the monarch’s rule. The October Revolution, on the other hand, was much more organized, but only run by a small group of people. This group was composed of the Bolsheviks, a relatively unpopular political party. However, their ability to strike while the Russian government was disorganized, in combination with their tactical nature, made their efforts successful. When they overthrew the provincial government that had been in place, they formed the Soviet Union.
Camden: So correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe the Bolsheviks began as a group primarily composed of nobles. How did the people of Russia react to the actions of this minority?
Maelily: Yes, that’s exactly right. The Bolsheviks had relatively little support or popularity with the people of Russia when they began the institution of the Soviet Union, but by the end of 1917 their popularity has greatly increased. By this time much of the Bolshevik population is composed of younger citizens eager to make change. Little by little though, the Bolsheviks will lean towards communism and in 1918 communism will be fully established in Russia. Unfortunately, this will also spark the Russian Civil war that will last for at least another four years.
Camden: So clearly we’re looking at a pretty volatile time, with the government parties slipping and falling over one another to take control--it seems like a real mess. What might lead a country to this violent state?
Maelily: Well, it’s pretty simple really. In events before the Russian Revolution, absolutism was big. Class separation practically defined the age, and the people who really suffered, the regular joes if you will, were fed up. They were working themselves to the bone just trying to get enough money to buy food. The nobles walked on commoners like they were the floors of a palace. Eventually, the people couldn’t put up with it anymore. But the thing is, even while most people were just trying to fight for their rights, others just used the confusion to elevate their political power, which essentially took everyone back to square one, where a minority held the majority of wealth and power.
Camden: I see. This reminds me of another revolution that occurred just before the Russian Revolution.
Zack: Were you perhaps thinking of the French Revolution? Here in France, 1789 July 14, things are about to get ugly--fast.
The Storming of the Bastille became a celebrated day for France, representing one of the first actions taken to return France to a state of liberty and equality. And yet on this day, the true nature of the actions made by many a French citizen were so wretchedly wild and violent, that they could hardly represent a return to freedom.
But nevertheless, the French people would continue to pursue the rights they had been stripped of. And much like in the Russian Revolution, select individuals would use the chaos as an opportunity to gain power.
The chaos I speak of mainly involves a simple machine that became incredibly adored by the revolution. 455 deaths by guillotine were officially recorded, but the true number of people executed is well over a thousand. And after most of the royal family had been offed-- it didn’t stop. People were killed without hesitation under suspect of being enemies to the republic. As such, many of the people who tried to take leadership roles were killed as soon as they made a wrong move.
Camden: Talk about bloodlust! And if you know anything about history, you’ll know these revolutions spread like wildfire. In fact, the French Revolution was somewhat inspired by the American Revolution of the same century. After all, who do you think was funding that particular revolution? And then looking into the future a bit, history is littered with revolutions. Consider the Arab Springs of the 21st century for instance! And, the multiple revolutions that followed. The pattern of strong class disparity leading to eventual upheaval of the government by the lower class has been recognized by many a historian. Philosophers ponder evermore on the implications of the recurring theme. Is it destined to continue into eternity?
That and more after a short commercial break.
[Insert Commercial Written and Directed by Zack and Camden]
Camden: Welcome back. We’ve been discussing the Russian and French revolutions and the implications of recurring revolution patterns. In the grand scheme of time, what is the purpose of these events and will they ever bear fruit?
Maelily is prepared to tell us some of the more interesting details of the Russian revolution and answer the questions people have been asking for all time.
Maelily: Yes. I’ve taken us back to early 1917. It is mid January and I can tell you that pre global-meltdown Russia is a cold, cruel time. All around we can see good Russian citizens starving for the benefit of a select few. A weak emperor, Nicholas II sits atop the throne, with the impending threat of a nation fed up with the unruly government.
Camden: Most of us from the thirty-first century have a hard time remembering the world conditions before the effects of global warming died down, let alone the government conditions in Russia at the time of the Russian revolution. Maelily, would you mind telling us more about why Nicholas II was considered weak?
Maelily: Not at all. Nicholas had married Princess Alexandra, the granddaughter of Queen Victoria. At the time, the wish of the people was to change the government to something more democratic. The tsar already didn’t want to change the autocratic principles, but it was Alexandra that actively kept his rule strictly monarchist. Because of the influence she had over her husband, Alexandra was quite unpopular with the Russian nobles, and Nicholas was considered incapable for always agreeing with his wife.
Zack: Excuse me Camden, can I cut in here?
Camden: Sure Zack, go right ahead.
Zack: Although the injustice in the ruling of Russia was one of the major components that led to the revolution, I believe there was a bit more to the government’s collapse. You may note that the Russian revolution occurred shortly after the end of World War I, a war that did not end well for Russia.
Maelily: That’s true. The defeat by Japan in the war 1904-05 left Russia in a bad way. It was a damaged nation, from the jenga style government that had stacked a little too tall, to the constitution-less image it presented to the world.
Because of all this, the people can’t wait any longer. They will come together and stand as one. They will destroy police stations, and even while they are shot down, they will not stop. The February revolution will end with the Abdication of Nicholas II. The Romanov family will end up placed under house arrest, and in 1918, Bolshevik authorities take the tsar, his immediate family, and four servants to a cellar to be shot.
Interestingly though, it is said when the daughters are shot, the bullets bounce off because of the jewels they had concealed in their clothes. When they try to stab the girls with bayonets, the same problem will occur. Eventually, though, the Bolsheviks will have the girls shot in the head at close range.
Camden: That is interesting. It occurs to me that the practice of killing the ex-rulers isn’t exclusive to the Russian revolution. And it brings up a lot of questions. Is it necessary to kill those who oppressed you even after you have reclaimed power? Is forcing others to experience what you experienced the only way to exact revenge?
I believe Zack will have something to say about this...
Zack: Actually, yes. Much like the supporters of the Russian Revolution, the supporters of the French Revolution saw fit to extinguish as many members of the Royal Family as they could, in addition to many, many nobles. In fact, the Republic that took over France could take the life of anyone that stood in it’s way.
So looking at that connection, it’s clear that many revolutionaries, saw fit to kill or be killed if you will. Many have questioned the morality of those at the head of the French revolution for their contradictory values. But was there a better way to change France?
Even with the current trans-timeline technology, we haven’t discovered a timeline that led France to a different future. As an individual, I suggest you find for yourself, what this means to you, but for me, this is an indication that to achieve justice, we can not always be fair.
Camden: Thank you Zack. I think we’ve all learned a lot tonight, from moral values to recurring sequences of events.
Perhaps to change the world for the better, we need to fight. Perhaps we need to think strategically before making any moves, and perhaps we need to remember our past before we get too caught up in the future, but at least one thing is clear. We need to open our eyes, and take a look around. Remember that things can change quickly and decide for ourselves what we think, and what we can learn, from the present, past and future.
Next we’ll be delving into the world-wide uproar of 2112. How was life after the first international time war? Find out at your convenience with Contemporary Timelines future newspan option. That’s all for now, we’ll catch you next time.
Camden : Hello and welcome to Contemporary Timelines, the best trans-timeline news in the spacetime continuum. Momentarily we’ll be looking at some of the influences seen in revolutions and the patterns that have brought us to the future, present and past.
To start, it helps to recognize the fact that through chrononaut technology we have come to understand that revolutions have intercepted nearly every era without exception. So what can we learn from the patterns in our timeline? Maelily is reporting live from 1917, Russia.
Maelily: Thank you Camden.
The time is 1917, right around October. Future historians will call this period the October Revolution, and the revolution that preceded it, the February Revolution. These two revolutions took place in the same year, but were quite different.
The February revolution displayed violent acts and much more desperation, but only elicited the abdication of Nicholas II. It was a motion put forth by the majority of Russia’s population who had suffered under the monarch’s rule. The October Revolution, on the other hand, was much more organized, but only run by a small group of people. This group was composed of the Bolsheviks, a relatively unpopular political party. However, their ability to strike while the Russian government was disorganized, in combination with their tactical nature, made their efforts successful. When they overthrew the provincial government that had been in place, they formed the Soviet Union.
Camden: So correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe the Bolsheviks began as a group primarily composed of nobles. How did the people of Russia react to the actions of this minority?
Maelily: Yes, that’s exactly right. The Bolsheviks had relatively little support or popularity with the people of Russia when they began the institution of the Soviet Union, but by the end of 1917 their popularity has greatly increased. By this time much of the Bolshevik population is composed of younger citizens eager to make change. Little by little though, the Bolsheviks will lean towards communism and in 1918 communism will be fully established in Russia. Unfortunately, this will also spark the Russian Civil war that will last for at least another four years.
Camden: So clearly we’re looking at a pretty volatile time, with the government parties slipping and falling over one another to take control--it seems like a real mess. What might lead a country to this violent state?
Maelily: Well, it’s pretty simple really. In events before the Russian Revolution, absolutism was big. Class separation practically defined the age, and the people who really suffered, the regular joes if you will, were fed up. They were working themselves to the bone just trying to get enough money to buy food. The nobles walked on commoners like they were the floors of a palace. Eventually, the people couldn’t put up with it anymore. But the thing is, even while most people were just trying to fight for their rights, others just used the confusion to elevate their political power, which essentially took everyone back to square one, where a minority held the majority of wealth and power.
Camden: I see. This reminds me of another revolution that occurred just before the Russian Revolution.
Zack: Were you perhaps thinking of the French Revolution? Here in France, 1789 July 14, things are about to get ugly--fast.
The Storming of the Bastille became a celebrated day for France, representing one of the first actions taken to return France to a state of liberty and equality. And yet on this day, the true nature of the actions made by many a French citizen were so wretchedly wild and violent, that they could hardly represent a return to freedom.
But nevertheless, the French people would continue to pursue the rights they had been stripped of. And much like in the Russian Revolution, select individuals would use the chaos as an opportunity to gain power.
The chaos I speak of mainly involves a simple machine that became incredibly adored by the revolution. 455 deaths by guillotine were officially recorded, but the true number of people executed is well over a thousand. And after most of the royal family had been offed-- it didn’t stop. People were killed without hesitation under suspect of being enemies to the republic. As such, many of the people who tried to take leadership roles were killed as soon as they made a wrong move.
Camden: Talk about bloodlust! And if you know anything about history, you’ll know these revolutions spread like wildfire. In fact, the French Revolution was somewhat inspired by the American Revolution of the same century. After all, who do you think was funding that particular revolution? And then looking into the future a bit, history is littered with revolutions. Consider the Arab Springs of the 21st century for instance! And, the multiple revolutions that followed. The pattern of strong class disparity leading to eventual upheaval of the government by the lower class has been recognized by many a historian. Philosophers ponder evermore on the implications of the recurring theme. Is it destined to continue into eternity?
That and more after a short commercial break.
[Insert Commercial Written and Directed by Zack and Camden]
Camden: Welcome back. We’ve been discussing the Russian and French revolutions and the implications of recurring revolution patterns. In the grand scheme of time, what is the purpose of these events and will they ever bear fruit?
Maelily is prepared to tell us some of the more interesting details of the Russian revolution and answer the questions people have been asking for all time.
Maelily: Yes. I’ve taken us back to early 1917. It is mid January and I can tell you that pre global-meltdown Russia is a cold, cruel time. All around we can see good Russian citizens starving for the benefit of a select few. A weak emperor, Nicholas II sits atop the throne, with the impending threat of a nation fed up with the unruly government.
Camden: Most of us from the thirty-first century have a hard time remembering the world conditions before the effects of global warming died down, let alone the government conditions in Russia at the time of the Russian revolution. Maelily, would you mind telling us more about why Nicholas II was considered weak?
Maelily: Not at all. Nicholas had married Princess Alexandra, the granddaughter of Queen Victoria. At the time, the wish of the people was to change the government to something more democratic. The tsar already didn’t want to change the autocratic principles, but it was Alexandra that actively kept his rule strictly monarchist. Because of the influence she had over her husband, Alexandra was quite unpopular with the Russian nobles, and Nicholas was considered incapable for always agreeing with his wife.
Zack: Excuse me Camden, can I cut in here?
Camden: Sure Zack, go right ahead.
Zack: Although the injustice in the ruling of Russia was one of the major components that led to the revolution, I believe there was a bit more to the government’s collapse. You may note that the Russian revolution occurred shortly after the end of World War I, a war that did not end well for Russia.
Maelily: That’s true. The defeat by Japan in the war 1904-05 left Russia in a bad way. It was a damaged nation, from the jenga style government that had stacked a little too tall, to the constitution-less image it presented to the world.
Because of all this, the people can’t wait any longer. They will come together and stand as one. They will destroy police stations, and even while they are shot down, they will not stop. The February revolution will end with the Abdication of Nicholas II. The Romanov family will end up placed under house arrest, and in 1918, Bolshevik authorities take the tsar, his immediate family, and four servants to a cellar to be shot.
Interestingly though, it is said when the daughters are shot, the bullets bounce off because of the jewels they had concealed in their clothes. When they try to stab the girls with bayonets, the same problem will occur. Eventually, though, the Bolsheviks will have the girls shot in the head at close range.
Camden: That is interesting. It occurs to me that the practice of killing the ex-rulers isn’t exclusive to the Russian revolution. And it brings up a lot of questions. Is it necessary to kill those who oppressed you even after you have reclaimed power? Is forcing others to experience what you experienced the only way to exact revenge?
I believe Zack will have something to say about this...
Zack: Actually, yes. Much like the supporters of the Russian Revolution, the supporters of the French Revolution saw fit to extinguish as many members of the Royal Family as they could, in addition to many, many nobles. In fact, the Republic that took over France could take the life of anyone that stood in it’s way.
So looking at that connection, it’s clear that many revolutionaries, saw fit to kill or be killed if you will. Many have questioned the morality of those at the head of the French revolution for their contradictory values. But was there a better way to change France?
Even with the current trans-timeline technology, we haven’t discovered a timeline that led France to a different future. As an individual, I suggest you find for yourself, what this means to you, but for me, this is an indication that to achieve justice, we can not always be fair.
Camden: Thank you Zack. I think we’ve all learned a lot tonight, from moral values to recurring sequences of events.
Perhaps to change the world for the better, we need to fight. Perhaps we need to think strategically before making any moves, and perhaps we need to remember our past before we get too caught up in the future, but at least one thing is clear. We need to open our eyes, and take a look around. Remember that things can change quickly and decide for ourselves what we think, and what we can learn, from the present, past and future.
Next we’ll be delving into the world-wide uproar of 2112. How was life after the first international time war? Find out at your convenience with Contemporary Timelines future newspan option. That’s all for now, we’ll catch you next time.
Tack it Back: News Video
This is a link to the video I prepared with the help of my group members for the 'Let Them Eat Cake' project, I hope you enjoy it!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HA1YLbsB9I&feature=youtu.be
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HA1YLbsB9I&feature=youtu.be
Self Reflection
Cypress Ellen
Personal Contributions
Humanities
12/3/12
I admit, my contributions acted more as a base to our final product, rather than being actively a part of our presentation. I wrote the script myself, because I preferred not being filmed and I wanted my teammates to focus on their roles and the filming process. I wasn’t able to communicate at the right times as much as would have been helpful, so I did fall short a little on facilitating collaboration on the script. Nonetheless, I do believe that the script I created was of the quality it should have been and suited my teammates well.
For the annotated bibliography, I only did two of the ten citations, and to make up for this I tried to go back and check on others work, adding capitalizations and finishing sentences, in case they had forgotten. In addition I also did some minor formatting cleanups, but I didn’t have time to spend too long on that and sadly it’s not really my forte. The final product is not what I would like it to be, but I do think I put my full effort into it.
I couldn’t add as much to the commercial, partially because I was busy with the script, and partially because I wanted to give the other members of my group the chance to work on something they would enjoy more than a newscast script. I did however, help by providing costumes as best as I could to benefit the actors.
During the evening presentation I was a as ready as anyone to answer questions. I did extensive research trying to grasp whatever I could about the Russian revolution and I was prepared to talk about it. Unfortunately, I only used my own research for the script so perhaps I didn't cover as much as I could have, but I intended to complete my script as quickly as possible so that our group would have a framework and not feel lost.
I did an assemblage on my own, so that I could have artistic liberty in the piece. I really don't like to be tied down when it comes to something like art, and because this was a pretty conforming project, the assemblage box felt like a good place for me to break away and have my independence.
Overall, I think I was a great backbone to our group. I did the research, made the first moves, directed where I could and tried really hard to ensure that it all came together. I may not have been as exciting or lively as my group members, but I really worked hard and helped out where I could.
I'm not sure if you'll feel, after what we presented, that 91 is a fair grade for me. I guess I feel like I put enough effort into the presentation by creating the script along with every other little thing that was just too menial for my teammates. I recognize that I could have done better, so I certainly wouldn't push for a higher grade. But nonetheless I think what I contributed to our project warrants a 91.
Personal Contributions
Humanities
12/3/12
I admit, my contributions acted more as a base to our final product, rather than being actively a part of our presentation. I wrote the script myself, because I preferred not being filmed and I wanted my teammates to focus on their roles and the filming process. I wasn’t able to communicate at the right times as much as would have been helpful, so I did fall short a little on facilitating collaboration on the script. Nonetheless, I do believe that the script I created was of the quality it should have been and suited my teammates well.
For the annotated bibliography, I only did two of the ten citations, and to make up for this I tried to go back and check on others work, adding capitalizations and finishing sentences, in case they had forgotten. In addition I also did some minor formatting cleanups, but I didn’t have time to spend too long on that and sadly it’s not really my forte. The final product is not what I would like it to be, but I do think I put my full effort into it.
I couldn’t add as much to the commercial, partially because I was busy with the script, and partially because I wanted to give the other members of my group the chance to work on something they would enjoy more than a newscast script. I did however, help by providing costumes as best as I could to benefit the actors.
During the evening presentation I was a as ready as anyone to answer questions. I did extensive research trying to grasp whatever I could about the Russian revolution and I was prepared to talk about it. Unfortunately, I only used my own research for the script so perhaps I didn't cover as much as I could have, but I intended to complete my script as quickly as possible so that our group would have a framework and not feel lost.
I did an assemblage on my own, so that I could have artistic liberty in the piece. I really don't like to be tied down when it comes to something like art, and because this was a pretty conforming project, the assemblage box felt like a good place for me to break away and have my independence.
Overall, I think I was a great backbone to our group. I did the research, made the first moves, directed where I could and tried really hard to ensure that it all came together. I may not have been as exciting or lively as my group members, but I really worked hard and helped out where I could.
I'm not sure if you'll feel, after what we presented, that 91 is a fair grade for me. I guess I feel like I put enough effort into the presentation by creating the script along with every other little thing that was just too menial for my teammates. I recognize that I could have done better, so I certainly wouldn't push for a higher grade. But nonetheless I think what I contributed to our project warrants a 91.
Works Cited
My bibliography for this project can be found here.