Traditionally, my favorite class to teach has been antique process photography, also known as alternative process photography. It is a combination of photography, painting, printmaking, chemistry, with an added dash of experimentation. I have always loved the amount of playing/experimentation/risk taking my students are able to do in this class but looking back I now realize that it was heavily process based. There was not an overall idea like the big ideas we have been talking about over the past week. I think if I were to teach this class again in the future, I would integrate this conceptual idea as well as reflection time into my class to help give the students work more artistic depth and personal connection.
In my past work I relied on my visuals to tell very personal, yet ambiguous truths about my experiences. For me it was a safe form of communication and therapy, but without directly telling peers my darker stories. One of these bodies of work dealt with the murder of my uncle in his car. I photographed at night using my car headlights to light the scene and create a sense of mystery, suspense, and open-ended meaning. Like the book mentioned, I believe that sense of connection to my personal story inspired me to create an entire portfolio based solely on person narrative. I do not believe the work would have had the same depth or continuity if it was based on technique alone.
My art piece serves as an updated continuation of last week’s journal entry photograph, but with an added metaphor for my understanding of big ideas, and my experience with experimentation. The more I read about big ideas the more my understanding of the concept ebbs and flows or goes in and out of focus. I do understand how a big idea can span over a lifetime of work regardless of the theme changes, but when I look at my different portfolios, I am not certain I could tell you they have a consistent big idea or multiple big ideas.
While I am still dealing with a bit of confusion over big ideas, I do feel like the concept has got me thinking about how I could teach for deeper personal connection and meaning, however; I worry that my lack of comprehensive understanding of big ideas could lead to a similar situation as was mentioned in chapter one. Jack did not fully understand Goldsworthy’s big idea and that led to a project that did not align with the artists rules or parameters. His lack of understanding did lead to a good class discussion on the subject, but would it have been more helpful for the teacher to discuss this with Jack prior to the project being due? My teaching philosophy in the past has always been learn from failure or mistakes, but I’m not sure what the correct answer is here. Both possibilities could come with greater understanding for the class. It is something for me to think about when teaching in the future.
Comments