Comments on: More on Teaching the Art History Survey

By: video

video — Tue, 18 Jan 2011 23:11:19 +0000

Thanks for the constructive feedback regarding the Overworld limitations and linearity, I only felt it limited in the sense that you aren’t truely able to ‘explore’ fully in the way that could in other Zelda games – remember the underground caverns you could once find? – and quite frankly I miss that and it is basically linear in the sense that your destination is already chosen, yes you are still exploring and in a wonderful new way but this Overworld ‘Transport’ also highlights the limitations of what Nintendo can do with a 3D Zelda game on the DS but what they ‘have’ achieved is still impressive and I do acknowledge that fully.

By: Assignment #2 – 5 Blogs Visited | New EDTEC Skills

Assignment #2 – 5 Blogs Visited | New EDTEC Skills — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 04:41:42 +0000

[...] 5 – Site – Smarthistory: The Blog http://smarthistory.org/blog/ [...]

By: Dana

Dana — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 03:33:13 +0000

This is my first visit to Smarthistory and the blog. I found you on the Edublog Awards, and I’m so glad! I enjoyed this post … the authenticity of this man’s love for the subject is so engaging.

By: Beth

Beth — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 12:55:20 +0000

Thanks for the comments Chad! I think it’s important for students to see these images while in class in the way that they will experience them if they go to these locations now, not just in some imaginary pure universe. I’m not sure if that’s what you mean by acknowledging or incorporating into pedagogy. And yes, this only works for objects still in situ – but that’s a significant number of objects we teach in the survey course.

By: Chad

Chad — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 04:52:19 +0000

By the way, my favorite part of this video is when the lights go out – brings back some memories of the eternal struggle to keep the monuments lit while visiting. I sunk SO many 500 lire coins into the Sassetti Chapel over the years…

By: Chad

Chad — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 04:48:10 +0000

I agree that we need to teach about the ways in works continue to accrue meaning, and three issues come to mind after reading these recent very interesting posts on the textbook:

1) Isn’t the tourist prespective already one of the more dominant modes through which people learn about art outside of an academic setting? I think it is important to acknowledge this context in an academic course, but I am not sure about the degree which this perspective should be incorporated into pedagogy.

2) These recent posts all address works that remain in situ. When I teach Piazza San Pietro, I do find it very helpful to have students who have been there describe their experiences of the space. But many works have already been visually isolated through techniques of museum display. The last time I was with a class at the Met, we talked about how we were seeing Ghirlandaio’s St. Christopher from an “impossible angle,” since the museum brings it so close to the visitor. Do you think that works in museums merit a similar shift in perspective?

3) Is falling in love with a work of art you haven’t “seen” really like falling in love with a lie? Aren’t “Thirty Better Than One”?

http://www.aiwaz.net/uploads/gallery/thirty-are-better-than-one-1625-mid.jpg

(Another way of thinking about how works continue to accrue meaning apart from where they are housed.)