Note: To protect the privacy of our members, e-mail addresses have been removed from the archived messages. As a result, some links may be broken.
On Thu, 10 Apr 1997, henry wrote:
> I've just gotta take this oportunity to ask a few things here Sheldon!
> Obviously, our perspectives differ. Your assertions appear unequivocal
> and objective.
I would not say obviously, I can not locate your
definition of "artist" in the archives henry, but I'll give it a go on
> First, Originate to what degree and using what unit of measurement?
The idea to create comes from the artist, not an assignment.
> Second, Initiate to what degree and using what unit of measurement?
The process, the work is begun at the instigation of the artist,
> Third, What order of creation are we discussing here?
Order? In my context I meant "produce", make, execute.
> Fourth, How complex an artifact and in comparison to what as examples of
> inadequate artifacts? What is the standard of quality this
> artifact will be measured against. How "standard" or universally
> accepted is this measurement of "quality"?
Complexity is irrelvant, simple may be profound and vice versa.
The standard of quality is determined by the intent of communication (see
next query) If the intent is personal, then personal standards prevail,
if for society, current cultural context measures, only time will
reveal quality across civilizations.
> Fifth, How is the word COMMUNICATION used here; textually, emotionally
"virally", some Of The Above, all OTA, none OTA, other than the above.
I would say an irreducible intent of art is to communicate,
with self, with others, with society, etc.
> Sixth, How complete an idea?
I suppose that would depend on the intent to communicate.
> Seventh, How will competence be judged and against which standard?
> Eighth, How will confidence be measured and against who's standard?
these two are interdependent. Competence reflects the success
of being able to create to communicate at what ever level desired,
confidence, the acceptance of the creation and the determination to
present it as the product of your creation without fear of failure.
> Finally, How contexted are these students in your perspective on the
> constitution of an artist?
Well, the writing prompts I shared with you were not a response
to my working definition I posted earlier this week. They were from a
much earlier written assignment. I share them to hopefully illustrate the
fact that students still hold true to their own definitions in spite of
the contextual influences of their teachers.
> > I ask respectfully. I
have no problem with your presentation
as an > approach to the question and as a valid pedagogical avenue.
> I just like to understand how alternate views, the "competition" perceive
> things differently than I. Also it helps to have something to draw on
> when I make comparisons.