Man of Steel:
First of all, I found myself a little irritated there were not any pictures... but then, I thought to myself, ok, as I read, I shall do my best to imagine these forms. Of course, what I imagine is sprinkled with the perceptions of the author, but that idea intrigued me. If I were not sitting in the back of my car at Sleeping Bear Dunes National Park, Id probably try and draw what the author conveys and then later look up the actual pieces and compare and contrast. Just a fun experiment.
Reading through this article though, several poignant statements stood out for me. The idea that Serra's work is described as having "complexity, requiring constant attention" is a pretty big statement. As a teacher, I want my own students to be able to achieve some of this. But how? Is it about the problems we present to them? The Opportunities to ponder a concept from a different point of view? Materials? Freedom vs step by step constraints? As a teacher, if the project my students are working though is complex, requiring layers of thought, then the attention that goes into the process, will likely be present in the product. I think Serra's work is a good example to use because his work is not about making something pretty or visually appealing. It goes beyond that to something else. Having that option for a student frees them from the pressure of creating "something they think the teacher wants" or "something its supposed to be".
I also am intrigued with his list of simple tasks, to fold, to twist, to fold and so on. This echoes for me a little bit what I do with some of my students. To take a fundamental idea or principle and interpret it based on your experiences and perception. Serra's work seems more purist than what I do with kids as Serra's does not seem imbued with his own story other than the subtle layer of the choice he made in performing the task, but still, an interesting task.
"Rough simplicity is its genius" The steel behemoth, the idea that something so simple could illicit so much curious reaction, force movement (be it one of engagement or one of retreat) is powerful in a quiet and subtle way. What a different perspective to process with kids when considering art. It certainly emphasizes the relationship first between the artist and the process of the piece, which then takes on a new relationship when the viewer enters the field and has her own encounter. Art is not static. It is a continuous exchange.
Freedman: So, how do we as teachers know what meaning our students are making and or understanding from art (or all texts if we examine this from the semiotics perspective). I like the idea of transmediation, "taking understandings from one system and moving them into another sign system.
In my opinion, it is critical we raise the awareness of what screams for our students attention and arm them with techniques for processing this bombardment and also communicating effectively with it. To "use multiple literacies to compose videos, graphs, collages, role-play scenarios, interactive games, music and the like". In our classrooms this means we have to expand our own understandings. We need to "undefine" our ideas of what story telling is, what representation is, what teaching is, what matters. We need to be fearless (and even more so ... vulnerable) and set the example if we want our students to follow, or better yet, join. We need to look at what we teach and ask ourselves does this serve the kids we teach with what is happening right now for them.
"An emphasis on these multiple forms of representation continues to be seen as innovation" Why? Seriously? If we look at life there is not a separation between multi-modal events, all of life is a multimodal event. Shouldn't education echo real life and visa-versa?
.
No comments:
Post a Comment