Sunday, May 8, 2011

Gude Writings

 Value One:  "Engaging mess over keeping things neat"
Gude has a point here.  I agree that mess, or playful attempts, are important.  In my studio I always feel restricted near the end of a painting.  Any slip of the brush could be a terrible mistake.  I enjoy playing at the beginning of a painting.  No stroke can't be fixed, or even be wrong.  I have made some messes in my time, but I learn from them.  Isn't that the point of playful art making?  I am terribly obsessive at the end of paintings.  Everything has to be perfect and neat.  Why can't I finish an entire painting that is a mess?  I have never been able to come up with any that didn't fail miserably.
Messes are definitely necessary when first learning to create art.  I wish I had started out with making messes.  I think I would be a better artist now if I wasn't initially such a perfectionist.  I'm still a perfectionist when it comes to artmaking.  I think that inhibits my growth and evolution as an artist.

Value Two:  "Authentic artistic processes, over mimicking styles"
We are humans.  We learn by modeling or mimicking others.  What's wrong with initially mimicking a style in order to learn.  It isn't asking students to "feel fraud", but rather to attempt to create something that may help them learn to create their own.  There is an extent to how far a student should go with that.  They shouldn't playact "meaning making for the sake of the teacher".  But what if that is the only way to please the teacher.  Then there is a problem.  Teachers may expect meaning to come from a student that is not capable.  Or maybe they are capable, but the meaning isn't acceptable to the teacher.  What is the student to do then?  I am writing from experience here.  Teachers can be full of shit.  High school and college level.

1 comment:

  1. When Gude discusses "mimicking" styles she's not necessarily saying that learning technique is wrong, she's asking teachers who have students do projects that only look at a style (like impressionism) without teaching context, etc, to rethink their approach. Exploring the potential of materials and learning context are effective ways to teach students how to make meaning (when they have to think deeper about a material and subject). I agree that teachers who teach only technique cannot expect their students to just somehow know how to make meaning.

    ReplyDelete