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.

Lesson Plans


Re: Response to Henry (DBAE)

[ Thread ][ Subject ][ Author ][ Date ]
Rosa Juliusdottir (rojul)
Wed, 28 May 1997 23:58:24 GMT


To Henry and anyone else on artsednet interested in this discussion.
I am obviously another admirer of Henryīs writing even if I donīt always
agree with him. I also donīt even understand him at times until I read his
writing for the 2nd or 3rd time. But I find your writing Henry to be such
a very valuable input on our listserv and I have actually saved lots of it
too. I also liked very much the little personal input in this post. I do
wish english was the language I studied in or my mother tounge which would
make it easier to participate in discussion . But Iīll try anyway. About
what we look at in regards to art and artists I do think we have to take
an ecological viewpoint. Art does reflect the society it is made in and the
culture, I think you cannot seperate these two. as you say: "To a degree
they might be said to be co-creators and it can be interesting to imagine
how this might be occuring". A very interesting point. How can we teach our
students about any artist without a good look at the times; society,
community , culture etc. Yes it is more difficult when we go beyond the
Euro-american arthistory. And in DBAE that is where much of it is at. I
think it does not mean we cannot go and do the other things ourselves and
adapt them to DBAE, that actually is the beauty of it, it is not a fixed
methodology but something that can grow and develope as you want it to.
Now to what I found so interesting in another of your post. You said:"This
would be a good time for people to bring up DBAE resources that they have
found particularly useful in understanding sensual experiences and objects
in the terms of another culture. I'm not sure that we can ever experience
something the way that another might. While it seems important simply to
understand that there ARE other ways of understanding, experiencing, or
thinking about the things WE call art; I'd like the chance to find new ways
for myself of dealing with art. They might not correspond precisely with
the experience of others, but when I'm in the mode of "artist" part of what
I'm doing is playing with these "new ways" or perspectives and exploring
how much utility they have in my own, private, "artworld"". Should we be
able to experiencing something exactly the way another does? I think the
beauty lies in the fact that we all experience things, including ART,
differently. Is that not also what we want to teach our students that art
is one thing there is not only one right answer, that everyones answer and
solution can be right. Can we not also view all art together even if we
categorize them? Why not? Can we categorize them without using the "good"
or "bad"? I think we need not make a judgement wheather folk art is better
than fine art they are just different, just like northern europian
expressionists are different from southern european expressionists.
I realize I have maybe only gone on and on about nothing that is sometimes
what I feel I do in this. But in the end I have one question Henry. What
about the students? How do we want them to experience the aesthetics of the
OTHERS? That is what it is all about for me and that it is also why your
writing is so interesting because it makes me really think about how I can
best do that.
Best regards from the far north, Rosa