Jeanie Silver on sun 26 aug 07
Hi Elizabeth
This is how the class went...
First I set up some conversational firewalls. We talked about the
difference between self-criticism and self-doubt, and the toxic thinking
that goes with self-doubt. About how self-criticism is more like an editing
function and an on-going problem solving effort. This is taken as a given
in writing, but there is so much murky thinking and sentamentalism
surrounding 'the artist' and 'creativity' that people outside a formal
university setting(and often inside as well)consider rigorous critical
thinking as destructive, when its just a way of taking care of what you
create, another nurturing, really.
Then we talked about what I've been thinking of as the binary code of
creativity-a cycyling back and forth of engagement and assessment. When to
step back and assess, how to reengage....
We talked about how issues of craftsmanship are clear cut and accessable.
Will it pour,handle well do what its form says it will? Issues of
content,feeling, and meaning my students felt were more central and harder
to address, but still doable..
These are the tools we came up with:
Engagement
1The tools for this are:
Recognize that the first impulse to make any art can profound or trivial.
It doesn't matter. You can encourage the moment of recognition by
looking hard at any pot you can lay your eyes on
taking joy in noticing your surroundings
Going into the studio and doing whatever task comes to hand. The idea fish
will rise to the surface while your hands are busy for the very real reason
that for people like us-makers-hands and mind are two sides of the same
thing in some sense
Dive into what you love. For engagement to really take hold and take you
away , it seems to require that you are pursuing something you yearn
for-some idea, object, feeling..things done for secondary gain like money or
prestige are a little more problematic-they might not give you enough'juice'
for the long haul to see it through. But then again, they might....
Assessment
Some questions to avoid-Is it beautiful? Is it good? Is it art? What does
it say about me? These are'killer questions' that short circuit the whole
process and can start a downward spiral into self-doubt.
Make your questions active tense-what it does, not what it is
The questions you ask yourself, in the assessment phase are often peculiar
to your individual search, but might include:What part do my eyes keep
returning to? What part do my eyes avoid? Do I see the piece as a whole
first, and then the details? Or does some part of the piece lead my eyes to
the whole? Does the piece claim the space it occupies, or is the form
vacillating and tentative? Do the form and surface seem well-integrated or
combative?
Am I intentionally making a pot that speaks to a tradition and furthers it
or is my piece an eclectic jangle of 'one from column A and two from column
B'? If I've gone for combining traditions eclectically, have I done it in a
way that carries my meaning or obscures it?
The questions in assessment can be endless, but we all agreed it boils down
to three...What do I like about the piece? What do I dislike about the
piece? What will I carry forward into the next piece?
Everyone seemed to really like the thought that improving the merit of their
own work was just as much in their grasp as making it in the first
place..and why not?
Sorry its a long post. I didn't know how to shorten it...weak editing I
suppose..best wishes
Jeanie in Pa.
| |
|
