With Mariella Fostrup
I liked the comment from Professor Maria Nikolajeva when she quoted Leonard Helsing as saying 'all pedagogical art is bad art, but all good art is pedagogical'. So if you write a children's book from the point of view of creating good literature the learning will come naturally.
Comments
New comment
Makes sense - I think!
New comment
By setting out to teach you risk killing the joy for the subject or the risk that comes from a piece of controversial art. If you set out to create art, lessons can be drawn from it. This is of course disengenous as this supposes that an artist has by chance created a piece of art that is of value when teaching, let's say 'health and safety around a swimming pool' or the early Greek philosophers. From a teaching point of view I think it is worth looking around to see where art can help, a piece from Shakespeare, an evocative painting, even a novel or film. For example, some of books by Stephen Pressfield are used to 'teach' Greek History. I would recommend 'All Quiet on the Western Front' for an inrtroduction to the First World War. I'd even call on HGWells to introduce advertising as his novel Tono Bungay appears to preempt the likes of global brands like Coca-Cola.
Follies that try to teach and fail to either impress on an artistic level or to teach? The contents of the Millenium Dome. Art that inspires and can teach? The Angel of the North. Hockney's current RA Exhibition. Many of the cartoons of Steven Appleby.
Art can also be incorporated into teaching, for example, the increasing willingness of bands to allow their songs to be used in training and teaching videos.
New comment
Thanks for the examples. It does make sense now.