Jeff Lawrence on tue 11 feb 97
> Every child is born an artist.
> If allowed to grow and develop without adults imposing restrictive notions
> of pictorial representation, they will likely become very good artists.
....
> - Vince >>
Vince, your posts are usually very informative -- I generally learn a lot
from them.
But this is faith, not fact. Reminds me of another educator who asserted
that all children CAN sing, but for cruel limiting left-brain types who
teach them that they cannot. Those undoubtedly somehow hegemonic meanies
clip childrens' innocent wings (probably to feather their own nests, if I
may torture the conceit).
Maybe to a tin ear, all children sing equally well. But there will be
good-hearted people who can't suppress a wince during the all-school concert.
I wish my left brain worked as well as the lovebabe's ... but not enough to
wish away all differences in people's gifts.
Jeff Lawrence
Sun Dagger Design
ph/fax 505-753-5913
Akita-jin \"Lee Love\" on wed 12 feb 97
On Tue, 11 Feb 1997 21:18:26 EST Jeff Lawrence
writes:
>
>Vince, your posts are usually very informative -- I generally learn a
>lot from them.
>
>But this is faith, not fact. <...>
Hi Jeff,
I beg to differ. Every child _IS_ creative. Life is
inherently creative: an act against entropy. What needs to happen is
that every person needs to find their calling. Most people stop
searching far too soon and nip their creativity in the bud.
In the past, this creativity was more obvious because everyone
_had_ to be creative to survive: digging roots, hunting game, planting
seeds, weaving baskets, nursing babies, etc. For most of our existence
human beings have been involved in some type of creativity, or they died.
It is my opinion that our creativity justifies our existence.
If we don't create we are mere consumers, very similar to cancer. This
is a big problem in modern life.
Lee
/(o\ Lee Love In St. Paul, MN Come see some pixs of my AkitaPup:
\o)/ mailto:Ikiru@juno.com http://www.millcomm.com/~leelove
LeeLove@millcomm.com "You can observe a lot by watching."
.. -Yogi Berra-
Vince Pitelka on wed 12 feb 97
At 09:18 PM 2/11/97 -0500, you wrote:
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>> Every child is born an artist.
>> If allowed to grow and develop without adults imposing restrictive notions
>> of pictorial representation, they will likely become very good artists.
>...
>Vince, your posts are usually very informative. But this is faith, not fact.
>Jeff Lawrence
Well, no, as a matter of record, this is fact. What we do to our children's
natural artistic inclinations is criminal. Somewhere around the age of
seven to ten years old, our society usually teaches children that if they
cannot draw a horse or house so that it looks like a REAL horse or house,
they cannot be artists. In fact, skill in pictorial representation is a
useful and sometimes necessary thing, but it has nothing to do with being an
artist. Artistic creativity is in the INTERPRETATION of reality, not in the
immitation of reality. So while a young musician must learn to sing or play
on key, and must develop a sense of rhythm, visual artistic expression is
much more subjective and individual. The two are comparible only to a very
limited degree. It is a fact that almost all very young children have a
natural inclination to make visual images, and they abstract reality freely
and spontaneously. If allowed to CONTINUE to do so in a spontaneous and
creative way as they grow older, they will develop fluency in visual
expression, which is at the core of being a good visual artist. Some would
naturally favor pictorial realism, but most would not.
Those who have been on the list for a long time will have to forgive me for
repeating myself and prostelytizing (sp?) on this. For the last few
millenia our society has been obsessed with pictorial representation, based
on the precedents of Classical Greco-Roman humanism and Renaissance
Christian humanism. We are the only culture on earth with this irrational
fixation on pictorial realism, and it has completely warped or view of art.
It is up to us as individuals and educators to try to counteract this. I
like a quote by Jaqueline Ford Morie, a pioneer in virtual reality: "Reality
has always been far too small for the human imagination."
- Vince
Vince Pitelka - vpitelka@Dekalb.Net
Phone - home 615/597-5376, work 615/597-6801
Appalachian Center for Crafts
1560 Craft Center Drive, Smithville TN 37166
Akita-jin \"Lee Love\" on wed 12 feb 97
On Tue, 11 Feb 1997 21:18:26 EST Jeff Lawrence
writes:
>Vince, your posts are usually very informative -- I generally learn a
>lot from them.
>
>But this is faith, not fact. <...>
Something else occured to me Jeff, after I sent the first reply.
You comment assumes that the creative act requires a product. From my
perspective, the process of creativity is as important, if not more, than
the work produced. A person can be enriched by trying to create, even
if they do not reach their idea of perfection (who does? If you do, you
are not trying hard enough.) Being creative enhances a person's life.
It enhances mine. :^)
Lee
/(o\ Lee Love In St. Paul, MN Come see some pixs of my AkitaPup:
\o)/ mailto:Ikiru@juno.com http://www.millcomm.com/~leelove
LeeLove@millcomm.com "You can observe a lot by watching."
.. -Yogi Berra-
Peter and Sam Tomich on wed 12 feb 97
I agree with Vince, and my own professors on this one. It's a matter of
training. The processes involved are incredibly complex and we all
start at a different place. Rigorous eye-hand coordination training and
instuction in design and you can create perfectly wonderful drawings.
You can improve your spacial relationships in the same way, intense
practice. Even the so called tin-eared among us can work with ear
training and improve. Albeit these are simplistic examples and I have
already said it is complex. There is a lot more to our brains and
bodies than we understand, but never-the-less, it is not sheer magic at
work. I think it matters how much patience and desire you have and what
instruction you receive. If your spirit is damaged and you have no
*faith*, sure it's not going to happen. You need faith and the truth and
you can do anything.
Sam in Hawaii
Sandra Dwiggins on thu 13 feb 97
If we define an "artist" as someone who has the courage to make or
write what they think and feel, and not be held back by pre-conceived
notions of what is "correct" or "proper"---then I think Vince has
something there. Whether the talent is for drawing, singing, playing an
instrument, writing, etc, etc, etc. if it's nurtured and encouraged--then
yes--I think every child can grow up to be a good artist--in some way.
I just think back to the drawing sessions I used to have with my daughter
as she was growing up. One day a friend of hers was over and to
spend some time together, I said Let's all draw and color,using our
parakeet as a the model. So we did. I drew a very realistic
looking--fairly dead-looking--parakeet. My daughter did a bright yellow
wild looking thing with feet and bright green head that was very lively,
was about the right size and shape. We put both the drawings up on the
wall where we posted all those things. While we were eating dinner,
our parakeet (who we let fly anywhere, and live in hibiscus trees in the
window) who was very social, flew up to my daughter's drawing
several times and tried to perch near it while talking to it. It completely
avoided mine.
My daughter is not a painter or a potter. But she has the makings of a
good artist--she obviously can get the essence of a thing---where my
perfect likenesses--learned very carefully through several years of life
drawing classes--can't!!
I think recognizing the particular way a child sees the world and
nurturing and valuing what is good in that vision is the one of the most
important things we can do for our children. Every time I looked at her
direct intuitive interpretations of things--I wished I had done them--and I
told her so.
Okay--I'm off the soapbox---this may sound like cliche--but like most
cliches--it is true!
Sandy
Jeff Lawrence on thu 13 feb 97
Thanks, Vince and Lee, for your insights. I think we may be standing in
roughly the same spot looking in different directions, though I think I need
to spend more time looking your way. Positive outlooks are always better
than negative ones.
To be sure, there is no greater crime than stunting a child's enthusiasm,
both for his or her fulfilment as well as the creating of a better world
with more fully realized people in it.
My bugaboo is the leveling impulse which insists that nothing is better than
anything else and asperses anyone who would discriminate in any way. Doesn't
striving for excellence mean cultivating the ability to make those
distinctions? Is the beautiful thinkable without the ugly?
"The world is divided into two kinds of people: those who divide the world
into two kinds of people and those who don't." - Anon. Which are we?
Jeff Lawrence
Sun Dagger Design
Rt 1 Box 394L
Espanola NM 87532
ph/fax 505-753-5913
the Gallagher's on thu 13 feb 97
Again I must agree to this point and say that we all have the ability to
develop our creative talents, in what ever form they might take on, but the
particular talents that an individual may possess are as varied as the number
of individuals that possess them.
----------
From: Ceramic Arts Discussion List on behalf of Akita-jin "Lee Love"
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 1997 6:39 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list CLAYART
Subject: Re: New Potter/Every Child an Artist
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
On Tue, 11 Feb 1997 21:18:26 EST Jeff Lawrence
writes:
>Vince, your posts are usually very informative -- I generally learn a
>lot from them.
>
>But this is faith, not fact. <...>
Something else occured to me Jeff, after I sent the first reply.
You comment assumes that the creative act requires a product. From my
perspective, the process of creativity is as important, if not more, than
the work produced. A person can be enriched by trying to create, even
if they do not reach their idea of perfection (who does? If you do, you
are not trying hard enough.) Being creative enhances a person's life.
It enhances mine. :^)
Lee
/(o\ Lee Love In St. Paul, MN Come see some pixs of my AkitaPup:
\o)/ mailto:Ikiru@juno.com http://www.millcomm.com/~leelove
LeeLove@millcomm.com "You can observe a lot by watching."
.. -Yogi Berra-
Carol Ratliff.clayart.CLAYART.MAILING LIST on thu 13 feb 97
Vince,
I like your thoughts on children and art. I'm also pleased that everyone
else found the 20 year remark kinda cruel. I won't repeat who this was
because its irrelavant now but I can tell you I felt crushed and never asked
the question again of anyone.
I now have a 12 year old whose opinion I always consult. I like hearing an
honest untrained opinion because it isn't poluted with rules,standards and
others brainwashing yet. I get to hear simply "yes I like this, or no mommy
it doesn't turn me on." She isn't my only critic of course but I still rely
on her innocence. She'd even tell the king he has no clothes on & I like
that. If she really dislikes something I will set it on the shelf and look
at it again in a week or so when I'm not so attached and frequently get a
fresh look .
Sometimes I agree with her, sometimes not, but her advice is always worth
considering.
She asked me the am I an artist question and I had to say yes - how could I
say no to this creative soul who makes up watercolor pictures and peddles
them around the neighborhood for 25 to 50 cents each around xmas. She may
not have any training yet but she got an artist soul and manages to make 5 to
10 dollars every year since she's been about 5. She knows she is an artist
so who am I to argue?
I can't wait for my little business person to grow up to see what kind of art
she will enjoy doing. I think we should all be excited for our next
generation and enjoy seeing some of the worn paths we have created being used
over and over again, each time maybe with something new to add.
Carol Ratliff
San Diego
Timothy & Lauren Loftus on thu 13 feb 97
I just had to get my 2 cents in on this one.
Why shouldn't children be allowed to sing? They should sing! Even if they
don't sound that great, it could lead them to play a musical instrument!? Or
they could be dancers? Or artists? Why can't it be fact instead of simply
faith? Especially since having some personal form of artistic expression is
such a good release. I don't sing, but I wish I did! I wish I had at least
learned the basics. But I can play the flute. And I'm an artist.
We might have such calm, collected children in this nation if they were just
encouraged to spend some time with themselves in an expressive manner. If
the arts were supported in education from an early age, children would learn
they can be artists, like they (supposedly) learn that they can read a book
or do math, or (gasp) play football!
So many people say "I can't draw!" but they haven't had any practice at it.
Or, "I'm not creative!" but they have never been taught to give themselves a
chance. It does take practice, but any talent can be developed into
something that will give, if not the next Wonder of the World, at least deep
personal satisfaction to the individual.
And that's what I think.
Lauren Loftus
Monroe, LA
blade@linknet.net
>> Every child is born an artist.
>> If allowed to grow and develop without adults imposing restrictive notions
>> of pictorial representation, they will likely become very good artists.
>...
>> - Vince >
>Vince, your posts are usually very informative -- I generally learn a lot
>from them.
>
>But this is faith, not fact. Reminds me of another educator who asserted
>that all children CAN sing...
>Maybe to a tin ear, all children sing equally well. But there will be
>good-hearted people who can't suppress a wince during the all-school concert.
>
Dave and Pat Eitel on fri 14 feb 97
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>Thanks, Vince and Lee, for your insights. I think we may be standing in
>roughly the same spot looking in different directions, though I think I need
>to spend more time looking your way. Positive outlooks are always better
>than negative ones.
>
>To be sure, there is no greater crime than stunting a child's enthusiasm,
>both for his or her fulfilment as well as the creating of a better world
>with more fully realized people in it.
>
>My bugaboo is the leveling impulse which insists that nothing is better than
>anything else and asperses anyone who would discriminate in any way. Doesn't
>striving for excellence mean cultivating the ability to make those
>distinctions? Is the beautiful thinkable without the ugly?
Jeff is making an excellent point here. There's a quote attributed to
Michael Cardew (I have it second hand) that "an artist is not a special
kind of person, but every person is a special kind of artist." I like it,
but believe that caution should be used. When one assigns the title
"artist" to a child with little or no acquired skill in "art", isn't it
possible we are diminishing the accomplishments of a Michaelangelo or a
Rodin? When we call a pottery student who's been working only a few months
a "potter", is there a chance we're making light of the lifetime
accomplishments of a Warren MacKenzie or a Lucie Rie? Praising the efforts
of a child or adult student is an important and necessary aspect of
teaching, I believe. But I also believe it is wrong to encourage
mediocrity and compromise the quest for excellence.
Later...Dave
Dave Eitel
Cedar Creek Pottery
Cedarburg, WI
pots@cedarcreekpottery.com
http://www.cedarcreekpottery.com
Bill Amsterlaw on sat 15 feb 97
Hi Jeff Lawrence who wrote:
>>
My bugaboo is the leveling impulse which insists that nothing is better than
anything else and asperses anyone who would discriminate in any way. Doesn't
striving for excellence mean cultivating the ability to make those
distinctions?
<<
It appears to me that there have always been people who DO art ... and other
people who want to talk about it. The people who do the talking try to
intellectualize the process, analyze it, categorize it, assign it to "periods"
or "schools", try to define influences and antecedents, ... define rules and
procedures and standards, ... discuss technology, ... compare one person's
work with that of another, ... find faults, ... try to define beauty and
excellence, ... reward artists who achieve high standards, criticize those who
don't, ...and, with good intentions, try to teach it.... All this is talk.
Nobody could be DOING art if they had these thoughts buzzing in their brains.
Creativity comes from a place where there are no words. From childhood onward
we all have the capacity to see the world through a child's eyes and create
works that reflect that view. If nurtured and protected, this capacity grows
stronger. But if we are subjected to too much talk, then we, too, learn to
talk ... and to "grow up" and leave all that non-verbal stuff in childhood ...
which stifles our ability to DO art and gives us our first lessons in learning
to talk about it.
I open the kiln to find an unexpected glaze result: A pot I expected to turn
out "good" turned out "bad". Because I had high hopes for the pot, I hesitate
to give it the hammer. A year later, during a quiet moment, I suddenly see
the same pot through a child's eyes and it pleases me. My original
displeasure comes from thinking and talking too much ... or worrying about
displeasing others: The pot failed to achieve a standard of excellence. But
the gentle soul inside me who likes to make all these sorts of things, is
capable of seeing "beauty" completely apart from all this talk. That pot
which I might have discarded may now become the beginning of a new creative
direction.
Talk numbs the creative spirit. An artist must keep the talk out of his/her
mind, ignore "standards of excellence", ignore intellectual definitions of
"beauty", ignore what anybody might say ... and just play with his/her
visions. Then, inevitably, after a period of fumbling (out of the harsh light
of critical judgements), you come up with something special that sets a new
standard for the talkers to talk about ... while the artist, oblivious to the
talk, sets off in a new direction....
- Bill Amsterlaw
Plattsburgh, NY
Akita-jin \"Lee Love\" on sat 15 feb 97
On Fri, 14 Feb 1997 09:00:26 EST Dave and Pat Eitel
writes:
> Praising the efforts
>of a child or adult student is an important and necessary aspect of
>teaching, I believe. But I also believe it is wrong to encourage
>mediocrity and compromise the quest for excellence.
Dave,
You and Jeff are setting up strawmen. I've heard nobody
support mediocrity here. Izak Pearlman is hardly mediocre (He is a
genius), but he understands why supporting the creative impulse is
necessary if we want more Michelangelos or Lucie Ries or, if we simply
want people to appreciate Michelangelo in the future.
If you look, not too far back in history, people were more self
sufficient and creative. Now we are mostly consumers who don't no miso
from kuso (Japanese for: soup from shit.) People don't know any better
because they don't have the creative experiences to give them the tools
to judge.
These issues are what got Morris and Yanagi into the arts &
crafts and mingei movements. Thinking that we are great artists who just
want to sell "goods" to the plebs is only adding to the problem (that's
my strawman.) :^)
Lee
/(o\ Lee Love In St. Paul, MN Come see some pixs of my AkitaPup:
\o)/ mailto:Ikiru@juno.com http://www.millcomm.com/~leelove
LeeLove@millcomm.com "You can observe a lot by watching."
.. -Yogi Berra-
Jeff Lawrence on sat 15 feb 97
Lauren,
True False
( )( ) Some people are short, some people are tall
( )( ) Some people are good athletes, some people are klutzes
( )( ) Some people are funny, some are dour
( )( ) Some people are smart, some are stupid
( )( ) Some people have (XXX) talent, others do not.
If you marked any False, we just disagree. Respectfully on my part, I
assure you. But I see serious social costs in denying real differences.
If talent goes uncultivated, it will wither. In Democracy in American,
Toqueville warns against the American tendency to equate equality under
the law with fool's inalienable right to deride intelligence. Good book.
I should read it again.
Best regards,
Jeff Lawrence
Sun Dagger Design
Rt 1 Box 394L
Espanola NM 87532
ph/fax 505-753-5913
Vince Pitelka on sat 15 feb 97
>Jeff is making an excellent point here. There's a quote attributed to
>Michael Cardew (I have it second hand) that "an artist is not a special
>kind of person, but every person is a special kind of artist." I like it,
>but believe that caution should be used. When one assigns the title
>"artist" to a child with little or no acquired skill in "art", isn't it
>possible we are diminishing the accomplishments of a Michaelangelo or a
>Rodin? When we call a pottery student who's been working only a few months
>a "potter", is there a chance we're making light of the lifetime
>accomplishments of a Warren MacKenzie or a Lucie Rie? Praising the efforts
>of a child or adult student is an important and necessary aspect of
>teaching, I believe. But I also believe it is wrong to encourage
>mediocrity and compromise the quest for excellence.
>
>Later...Dave
Dave -
I appreciate what you say here, but I cannot agree. In fact, I think that
much of the problem lies exactly in our tendency to apply the word "artist"
only to people who are extremely accomplished artists. We do not normally
just say that Michelangelo was an artist. We say that he was among the
greatest of artists. And Warren Mackenzie and Lucie Rie are great potters.
That does not make the beginner any less an artist or potter, and it in no
way diminishes our respect for the great artists and potters. To the
contrary, I would say it pays tribute to them, by affirming and continuing
the tradition.
- Vince
Vince Pitelka - vpitelka@DeKalb.net
Phone - home 615/597-5376, work 615/597-6801
Appalachian Center for Crafts
1560 Craft Center Drive, Smithville TN 37166
Jeff Lawrence on sun 16 feb 97
Lee Love makes the following excellent points:
> If you look, not too far back in history, people were more self
>sufficient and creative. Now we are mostly consumers who don't no miso
>from kuso (Japanese for: soup from shit.) People don't know any better
>because they don't have the creative experiences to give them the tools
>to judge.
>
> Thinking that we are great artists who just want to sell "goods" to the
> plebs is only adding to the problem
Adding the necessity of making money from our work muddies the waters. It's
too easy to equate excellence with saleability. There was a great opinion
piece in a recent CM about that -- a ladypotter had great fun talking about
how the Wall Street Journal really appreciated Paul Volkos's "guy pots"
because they sold for big bucks.
Bill Amsterlaw's thoughts are also interesting:
>It appears to me that there have always been people who DO art ... and other
>people who want to talk about it. The people who do the talking try to
>intellectualize the process, analyze it, categorize it, assign it to "periods"
>or "schools", try to define influences and antecedents, ... define rules and
>procedures and standards, ... discuss technology, ... compare one person's
>work with that of another, ... find faults, ... try to define beauty and
>excellence, ... reward artists who achieve high standards, criticize those who
>don't, ...and, with good intentions, try to teach it....
>
Sound criticism of the system, well-analyzed and well verbalized. Bill, your
insight makes me confident that your work reflects that focus and that I'd
admire it. But your comments embody the dilemma. You are not only a person
who does, you are also capable of sound analysis. Aristotle calls man "logon
zoon", a phrase which flips like an Escher drawing -- thinking animal or
animalistic thinker. Which is the noun and which the adjective? In Greek, it
can go either way and they just accepted the ambiguity. In our weak English
of this lesser age, we see the ambiguity as bad and to be eliminated.
I guess I can't figure out anymore if we're discussing a public policy
point, an education theory point, or an art-critical point. Whatever, I've
enjoyed the thread. I wish I were NCECA breakfasting with all of you and
we'd transcend these cyber-limitations.
Blindly groping the elephant of the All, I'm signing off Clayart for a
while. Somebody just ordered something I can't make yet, and I've got to go
wrestle some plaster by the midnight oil.
Jeff
Jeff Lawrence
Sun Dagger Design
Rt 1 Box 394L
Espanola NM 87532
ph/fax 505-753-5913
ken tighe on sun 16 feb 97
Bill Amsterlaw-- I must take issue with your comments. You make it sound
like we can only create like monkeys, with our right-side brains, and that
any analysis is negative. This anti-intellectual pose is downright
dangerous. We all need to stand back and talk about our work, see where it
came from, where it's going, etc. You say,"Talk numbs the spirit." BS!!!
Ask a poet if talk numbs the spirit. You say, "An artist must keep talk
out of his/her mind." What artist?? We all need to stand back and
critique each other. Talk is what seperates us from the monkeys. Talk is
why we have this forum.
| |
|
