After the first sentence or so I was so bored by the article Berg points to 
that 
I gave up.  I thought that this is only a redux of John Dewey's "progressive 
education" philosophy, or learn by doing idea.  That was of course a good idea 
that was more or less the concept that later undergirded the Bauhaus curriculum 
and still inform the curricula of many schools world-wide. 

There are always several sides to any issue, including anything to do with art. 
 For instance, I like much of Jed Perl's writing because he is so good at 
getting to the heart of the decadence of contemporary art while holding to the 
enduring ideals of high art. But I also like a lot of what his exact 
counterpart, Jerry Saltz, writes as the reigning champion of low art and 
popular 
culture, the cutting rawness of vulgarity and of all things profane.  
Somewhere, 
mixing the two together helps to locate the real condition of art -- and of our 
times.  
The same dialectic is true when it comes to creativity.  The 
free-experimentation with an eye on a goal or problem to solve is surely an 
important aspect of creativity as is the intelligent and practiced use of 
materials, tools, and rule-based methodologies.  That's really quite 
elementary, 
isn't it? 

Berg's insistent desire to raise one side up -- always the most conservative 
tradition-bound side --  and to push the other side down -- always the 
irreverent tradition-bashing side -- reveals his aversion to the use of 
dialectic which is necessary to any intellectual search for truth.

Saul's idea that seems to claim many 'discourses about art' each one embracing 
a 
tradition and each one at some great or small odds with the others is really a 
plea for a highly developed dialectic and, to me, offers the best albeit very 
complex access to what the art of our times is really about.  It's a 
multi-faceted dialectic.  I'd like to see Berg pay more attention to that level 
of thinking and much less attention to the daily deluge of journalistic 
dumbed-down re-hashing of well known ideas, like John Dewey's. 

Let's go to the thick soup, not the watered down soup of the soup. 
wc



________________________________
From: joseph berg <[email protected]>
To: aesthetics-l <[email protected]>
Sent: Wed, February 6, 2013 3:29:26 AM
Subject: "...Being taught something instead of exploring it for oneself  
discourages exploration that can lead to new conclusions..."

Does that mean that creativity is adversely affected by training?:

http://www.livescience.com/23522-young-children-think-like-scientists.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Livesciencecom+%28LiveScience.com+Science+Headline+Feed%29

Reply via email to