I absolutely agree that "seeing in learned" (pg. 53) - I may not be a studio artist and there are certainly days that I ask myself why I went to art school at all but the answer is always the same: Art school taught me how to see the world differently. I am frequently grateful for this. In addition to seeing, being formally trained in the arts has taught me how to process what it is that I'm seeing (or creating). What do you think I'm missing with my elitist art school point of view? (Sorry, I've been conditioned! haha.) Perhaps, the simplicity of images/beauty? I can't just look at something and say, "That's pretty." - I automatically analyze its composition, deeper meaning, process, material, and of course, the WHY?!?
With that said, it seems as though an English teacher is already starting behind the ball without any formal arts education. So much of what Faigley, et al is proposing requires an artful mind. Now, I realize our lot is not probably not the number crunching kind - but how many of us consider ourselves artistic? I see the logical connection between the questions you ask yourself about art and those same questions being asked about books/print literature. I guess I just really see a challenge for ELA teachers who are not comfortable in their artistic ability (in fact, they may not even think that way.) to incorporate seemingly advanced media technologies.
Some of the ads were exciting to look at, think about, etc. The "Red Cross ad" and the "Dr. Miller, Psychiatrist" are two that really stuck with me. Any of them stay with you? Why do you think they did?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The question rolling around in my head is about the differences between "art" and "rhetoric." Both are deliberately created, in some context, and the latter involves persuasion/manipulation. Is that fair? Teaching critical media literacy will allow kids to make more choices about consumption--choices that can lead to a better (more just, sustainable, peaceful) world. I also think there are hard realities to accept/resist about what "the culture" feeds us through media. Aja, I wonder if you regret not being able to just say, "That's pretty." Do we need to walk some line so that we don't deprive students of simplicity/blissful ignorance and put them in a place where everything is imbued with meaning/manipulation?
ReplyDeleteI also agree with you that "seeing is learning". I never went to art school but because of my theatre background and my english classes, I have to look at art (and images) critically. I think having a critical eye is important, not just when dealing with images. I also think that Merrilyne has a point in saying that we shouldn't deprive students of simplisticl thought. Not everything needs to be seen as having some sort meaning. I think that our goal as teachers should be finding that balance. I don't have a solution or an idea on how to do this effectivly but it is something to keep in mind.
ReplyDelete