Reading "Transformative Learning: Theory To Practice," I picked up on the idea of being critically reflective of the self and preconceived notions. I see this happen all the time at the Norman Rockwell Museum; people repeatedly ask, "What is the difference between fine art painting and illustration?" Some people think fine art painting is "more prestigious," where as others feel that way about illustration. Either way, when I offer my opinion from what I've learned (that neither is "more prestigious"- they are just different. Illustration is created with the intention to be reprinted and reproduced. There are certain ways you treat colors, compositions, and materials if the illustration will be reprinted. Fine art may have an intention behind it too, but ultimately it is created to be just as it when it's done: i.e. a canvas painted to be put on the wall as is...), combined with the (opposing) fact that Rockwell actually felt he was a "mere illustrator" versus a fine artist, people realize that art really is open to interpretation, and that there are fine lines people cross and set when "defining (good) art."
I hope to take this critical thinking process (about art) to IS183. It helps to disarm yourself when you are learning about or trying to make art: to remember that art is very much subject to interpretation/ subjective definitions, and that actually is something that makes it so beautiful. I am hoping it will allow my students there to feel more comfortable with the sometimes intimidating challenges of understanding and making art.
Hi Alicia, I enjoyed your explanation of the difference between fine art and illustration, it makes more sense to me now. Also, very interesting to learn that Rockwell saw himself as a 'mere illustrator' despite his success at capturing the intricacies of emotions of daily life. Agree with you that can be intimidating to understand as well as make art. Well said!
ReplyDeleteHi Alicia!
ReplyDeleteI agree with Peter about benefiting from your description of the difference between fine art painting and illustration. And I agree that one is not more prestigious or better than the other; they are just different. This makes me think about other artforms and whether they are just different from fine art painting or if one is better, is more profound than the other. This other form of art that I refer to is the art done for interpretive science. Examples are paintings of birds in guidebooks, or paintings of flowers, trees, insects, etc. in various guidebooks. In my teaching, I talked about some of the more well known artists who do this kind of work and kept wondering, "Is this really art?". The reason I focused on this so much was to integrate the art curriculum with the science curriculum so that students were using art to understand scientific concepts and information. Also, it meant that I was collaborating with the classroom teachers and that connection I found really helpful. So this inquiry leads me to a broader one: what qualifies as fine art? I suspect that question will not be answered any time soon. But I think the question and the question you addressed--the difference between fine art painting and illustration--certainly fosters autonomous thinking. Thanks for sharing your ideas with us.