I was shocked by Kamhi’s words: “Visual
Culture Studies has no place in art education.” I have to ask “does the woman
live in the 21st century?” I always consider the world today as a
“Visual World”, because we cannot live without images now. All the things such
as television, internet, posters, magazines send us information through images,
if we don’t have the ability to read it, we cannot get new information and even
cannot communicate with others. So it is obvious that visual culture study is
very important in art education at 21st century.
Kamhi’s understanding of art is ridiculous.
She only regarded traditional visual art as the real art. She thought
postmodern art such as “pop art”, “installation art” and “video art” should not
be classified or studied as “art”. Commercial and even photography are not
considered to be art as well. I can only say that this woman doesn’t know art
at all. Art always come from and reflect life. In the life we living today,
life is very different from traditional one, so art is certainly different. I
think if advertiser is creative, and present the artist’s own understanding of
this product, it is art. And I really love Gude’s value that “blurring the
boundaries between art and life.” Art is actually not so high and serious as
some people may think about, I believe in this art project, students will
experience the joy of art and love art more.
One reason supported for Kamhi is “visual
culture approach to interpretation lays stress on politicized issues that
divide society, rather than on shared human values and concerns.” Kids should
know the truth, know what is happening in the real world. But knowing this
doesn’t impede them learning the right human values and concerns. In Gude’s
opinion, visual culture study will let them have wide-ranging and nuanced
understandings of the world. I agree with Gude that visual culture will let
students see the world with fresh insight.
Kamhi thinks that visual culture studies
primed to ignore the artist’s actual focus and the entirely legitimate values
it may imply. I think the meaning of artwork including two parts, one is the
original purpose of the artist and the other is the ideas of audience. And some
of artists now make their work ambiguous to lead people think about it in
different ways. So the artist’s actual focus is not so important as Kamhi said.
The most important thing is to develop students’ ability of critical thinking
and imagination through reading and discussing the image. For example Visual
Thinking Strategies is a good way for art education.
Gude’s “New School Art Style” create
curriculum projects engage students in making meaning through meaningful
making, playing with methods, materials and ideas. I think it is really a good
way for 21st century art educators. I know most of the students will
not be professional artists in the future, but if they learn and make art in
this way, art will help a lot in imagination an creative thinking when they do
other things, and I believe they will love art and love to make some art in
their lives.
I read the blogs via google reader and it does not give me the opportunity to comment.
ReplyDeleteI am pleased with your response to the readings last week. You made this same point in class which is insightful. "I think the meaning of artwork including two parts, one is the original purpose of the artist and the other is the ideas of audience. And some of artists now make their work ambiguous to lead people think about it in different ways. So the artist’s actual focus is not so important as Kamhi said. The most important thing is to develop students’ ability of critical thinking and imagination through reading and discussing the image. For example Visual Thinking Strategies is a good way for art education. " is the kind of art education Gude described familiar or practiced in China?