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.
We keep the same subject titles but wander to incredible distances from the
topic. I think the earlier topic about first painting experience in high
school (First-time Painters..an objective choice) evolved into Maggie's
(mwhite) lament yesterday that "It's hard to get through their
thick heads that those TV artists--who I've never seen--apparently have been
painting the same basic things for 30 years, and have their schtick down pat.
They don't see all the practice that went into those happy clouds or whatever,
and they seem to have no concept of the fact that those shows must be edited.
Those artists aren't really completing a painting in 30 minutes, are they?"
This may have been in response to Judith's comment "Creating art is akin to
giving birth--very painful, very difficult, but a powerful and thrilling
experience--when the product comes to fruition. My middle school kids think
you create a painting in a half hour--(as in Bob Ross). They are so willing to
give up at the first sign of struggle."
Now who knows where this will lead? Judith and Maggie voiced a problem we all
have. I had hoped that the aesthetics and art history I have been teaching
throughout the 90s as DBAE took hold would obliterate this misconception about
the involvement of time and effort in creating art and about what constitutes
a designation as "work of art." This happy cloud syndrome comes up over and
over again. The Lowenfeld approach was easier for the teacher and soooo
huggie-kissie for the students, but surely once we get over this Bob Ross
hurdle with each new class, true learning begins to occur. I think it does.
In the 70s and 80s I had students achieving at the same level I do now, but
now it seems that there are more who truly "get it."
--- You are currently subscribed to artsednet as: hm-aen.edu To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-artsednet-4261K