From one Jane to another--Thank you!
The personal making and the facilitating of art making by others (teaching)
is what a brownie in the mouth on the way to the stomach is to a recipe on
an index card. Some folks like to talk recipes, but I prefer eating
brownies. One is pragmatically real while the other is t-h-e-o-r-y. Theory
is rhetoric. Doing is what counts. Theory fills books and fosters
conversation, doing gets visual art done.
From: Jane Altshuler [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 6:03 PM
To: ArtsEdNet Talk
Subject: Re: Didaction
Remember it is mostly art historians who named all the art movements - the
artists just made art to reflect their times. There nothing for you
theorists or art historians to talk about if we artists didn't make art.
I've been an artist for most of my life and my eyes
just glaze over at these "ism" discussions. I don't have time to theorize
about making art - I'm too busy making it.
"PALSROK-LILLY, CARIN" wrote:
> ouch on the "isms" thing. I'm new to here, and am enjoying the
> I hate to say it, but I honestly believe that theory affects how we teach,
which in turn affects our students. We either try and stay in touch with
what is going on in with new theories, or I'm afraid we lose touch with more
than just the latest theory.
> Postmodernism, deconstructivism etc...They are big words, but these words
reflect a mindset of our culture(s). Our kids are postmodern. They're
living it. If we can't relate to them and where they're coming from I think
we're gonna have a hard time teaching them.
> So I'm not as eloquent as some who write here, but this is what I truly