Sign in or 
Location: comm. david to mark 5/28
Discussion: Mark's response
Category:
Discussion Forum /
General Discussion
Share this
Showing 3 posts
|
azorch1 |
Mark's response
May 28 2008, 1:53 PM EDT
Dave,I think this is a great way to facilitate the project, especially in these early stages of concept development. I'll respond in order: The elements of the museum collection that you mention are great. The idea of working with meaning in art-making really does indicate a bias toward Modern and contemporary collections. I do like, however, that we can maybe look at ways of connecting to earlier and non-Western works also, so I'm glad the first floor remains viable. The GLE's are important for us to work with as they will become more and more vital to our curricular connections in the District. (How wonderful that it all seems to fit together so seamlessly!) As for the format of the original document: it was easy, it was created in Word, and I can send you a copy of the file if you want to use it as a template. anderson Do you find this valuable?
Keyword tags:
None
|
dadelman |
1. RE: Mark's response
May 28 2008, 5:05 PM EDT
I always seem to be most productive the first 2 hours of the morning and then drop off to sleep until just before the end of the day when then brainstorm hits again.Okay. I'm thinking about your Big Ideas and Essential Questions. I like their direction, essence, and flavor. I'm feeling the need to tighten them up to the point where an average HS kid can express an opinion based on his learning and observation and background. I'm also thinking, "Why a rural/metro collaboration?" Great effort and $$ will be expended to do this. Well, the first answer is, the grant that got us this equipment says we will. But the real answer lies in amending, or perhaps turning inside out a bit, the BI's and EQ's to ask for reflections about the uniquness of the VIEWERS' experience of time, place and identity, and how that plays a part in the reading of work of art. A Post-Modern work seems opaque because it expects the viewer to bring his own identity to the work, to complete it. Compare this to a traditional African object or even a Medieval or Renaissance work which is transparent in meaning, if the viewer is from the same place as the artist, which was intended when the work was made. They were made for homogeneous cultures (mostly). Pop, to a certain extent the same. But Post Mod... There's the contrast. The contrast in the art, to be responded to by the contrast in heterogeneous, collaborating viewers. Hmmm. Do you find this valuable? |
|
azorch1 |
2. RE: Mark's response
May 30 2008, 3:38 PM EDT
I'm on board with that twist. And frankly, the whole idea of the viewer as "having completed the work" is a very Post Modernist concept. (Think: Ken Aptekar, Robert Rauschenberg, and even the wily old father of Post Modernist thinking, Duchamp.) It will be important for participants to respond both visually AND verbally: word and picture is the essence of visual culture. And that, in and of itself, is an implicit acknowledgment of precisely HOW today's learners are visually informed. Tasty ideas, indeed!
Do you find this valuable?
|
