I teach High School Graphic Art & Design and naturally, advertising
comes up as subject matter and as illustration for many of the
principles of design. This is inevitable. However, the first day of
class I always make the disclaimer that I hate advertising. Many
students immediately identify with this sentiment, and many do not
understand what my problem is. We talk about the billions of
advertisements they will be exposed to in their lives, and what is the
purpose of advertising. I hold that our ever-expanding consumer culture
needs deconstruction, not more adherence..
I put emphasis on the philosophies behind communication and visual
perception. I also focus on how we as Westerners interpret visual
material and how non-Western cultures perceive visual material. We do
no product advertising exercises per se, but apply elements and
principles to other projects, photography and film.Much of what we do
for projects, are practical applications e.g. designing and screen
printing the school play posters, designing and creating school signage
etc.
Yesterday I read aloud to the class, an editorial from the local
alternative press, weekly paper The editorial criticized a local beer
manufacturer for putting it's logo on a "public work of art." The
editorialist was concerned that public art should not coincide with
advertising. None of the students could see the issue. They all thought
that if you can get your art out there via advertising, so much the
better.
I asked them if they thought the commissioner of the public art should
have the right to veto the artist's work, if it offended anyone in
anyway. I related the story of Diego Rivera's mural in Rockefeller
Center. There was still no recognition of any issue for the artist.
Most students felt that Riviera should have been straightforward with
his intentions.
I'm not sure if I presented the issue incorrectly, or if young people
are so thoroughly awash in the culture of advertising that they truly
see little or no distinction between art and advertising, or if other
things are at play in their interpretation of this (non) issue.
Any thoughts?
Peggy
On Friday, September 19, 2003, at 01:25 PM, Patricia Knott wrote:
> Judy Nagel says
> > Yes, They came up with a product and then named it. Each student
> did a
> > different product although if they requested to collaborate, I would
> usually
> > let them. They really got into it! Most of the time they would
> keep their
> > final product to themselves and at the end of the quarter, everyone
> would
> > reveal what they did. They all tried very hard to be the best. We
> would then
> > have a display to show what was produced. It was amazing what high
> quality
> > work was produced. It was a lot of fun for them and me!
>
> I am doing an ad lesson with my Advanced class and I have given
> similar choices. I am really impressed with their thinking. They seem
> to be very attuned to the techniques of the media and are very eager
> to apply their own thinking to this lesson. I have allowed for
> solutions to be accomplished through traditional graphic techniques,
> the computer, or video. They had no trouble creating something totally
> original or adapting something that already exists. I can't wait for
> the finished products.
> I started the lesson with over 20 creative thinking exercises.
> I am willing to share these exercises if you respond to me personally
> and can open a Word document.
>
> I strive to find lessons that reach what interests my students , not
> what interests me. Advertising seems to be a winner.
>
> Patty
> pknott@enter.net
>
> ---
> leave-artsednet-20359V@lists.getty.edu
