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.
Art and culture
Thu, 9 May 1996 09:15:59 -0500
- Next message: rmorgan: "Re: your mail"
- Previous message: JAMES H. SANDERS: "Re: Art Education and Technology"
On Tueday, May 7th, Henry asked:
< How is it
>that learning, especially the learning of Art, begins to lose value almost
>simultaneously with a child's dawning awarness of the word itself?
Could you also say WORLD?
>Is it related to generic projects applied genericly to a class as a whole
>and not made pertinant to the individual at a point where self-identity
>is just beginning to become conscious?
>
>Could it be related to some separation or divorcement of learning knowledges
>and skills from practical needs, interests, and opportunities for
>application? Does a "pre-emptive" approach to the process of "education"
>(as a prescriptive input) somehow degrade the child's inate involvement in
>learning?
>
>I just don't know... any suggestions out there?
No, henry, no answers, just more questions: like Have you ever read any of
Suzi Gablic's work? Specificly THE RE-ENCHANTMENT OF ART? I've been
researching a way to teach a new art apprec. class to high school aged
kids. I'd like to talk about the meaning of art in our culture. Perhaps,
until we answer what meaning art has for us RIGHT NOW, we won't be able to
answer your question:
>Could it be related to some separation or divorcement of learning knowledges
>and skills from practical needs, interests, and opportunities for
>application?
Gablic's view is that art needs to speak to the issues of a dieing planet.
If a kid's soul is dieing in response to his/her environment, that might be
a place to start. (?)
Suzanne Harp
smharp
- Next message: rmorgan: "Re: your mail"
- Previous message: JAMES H. SANDERS: "Re: Art Education and Technology"