From: Darryl Baird (dbaird@umflint.edu)
Date: 12/17/02-11:33:06 PM Z
Chris,
I think the ability to write passionately about photography or anything
else that parallels, crosses, intersects or accompanies photographs has
got to be superior to vocalization. It might be nice to view a series
with a statement, considered as a whole. Honestly, that makes much more
sense, both are great practice for "our" art world.
-DB
Christina Z. Anderson wrote:
><big snip> Out of curiosity, are these students also required to write about
>their
>
>
>>work?
>>
>>Darryl
>>
>>
>Darryl,
> Yes, they are required to write a sort of statement of intent or
>purpose at the beginning of the semester that includes such things as
>subject matter, technique, content, audience, influences. This particular
>student did so, and was very concise in his wording. Maybe from what you
>say it would be good to have them write an *end* statement. I also like the
>way you handle critique (the big part I snipped, here).
> BTW, I'm collecting all these suggestions/opinions into a sheet and
>going to discuss it with my fellow professors this week (they probably get
>sick of me talking about "THE LIST"). I also collected some stuff on the
>Japanese culture and its way of communicating. I also need to collect some
>more info on Zen. I want to open dialogue with them about a very crucial
>part of teaching photography. Obviously this interchange between myself and
>the other professor has been profitable because it hit home enough with the
>students so that they are all talking about it--the hot topic of the week.
>It is good that I go to grad school this next fall for two years (if some
>place accepts me), leave teaching for a while, and hash these issues out
>there, too.
> Interesting, I went to the final show last night, brought my kids, and
>you know what comment they made when viewing this student's work? They
>said, "I feel like I want to place a bed in front of them and just rest and
>contemplate." One of them, the 18 yr old, said it was her favorite work in
>the show. The essence of this man's work is beautiful. Montana
>landscapes--he is able to capture Montana, how it feels to me, much the same
>way as Russell Chatham does--muted colors on most, every one has delicate
>detail but nothing bold, no *mountains* to speak of unless they are small
>and in the distance (this in itself is unusual in that our valley is
>surrounded by dramatic mountains!), cows/deer and trees are all little
>teeny. One pic, my fave, had a little row of antelope on the horizon, so
>small and silhouetted you could barely discern them, in a mostly
>monchromatic wheat field and sky all the same sort of warm wheaty color.
>One was a quite bright green (for this student) grassy field with little
>teeny dandelion fuzzies sprinkled thruout. Small, delicate, understated,
>muted. Skies always have content. Horizon is usually straight, little above
>or below the middle of the picture. In essence, no bold drama here in line,
>shape, color, subject.
>Chris
>
>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 01/31/03-09:31:26 AM Z CST