tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22560219.post3462162736447205071..comments2023-12-07T20:31:28.197-05:00Comments on Islands of Joy: My IAM presentationSørina Higginshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10907200327850346539noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22560219.post-34482646227894036862012-03-05T15:43:09.802-05:002012-03-05T15:43:09.802-05:00What I mean is this: if there is only one arts-edu...What I mean is this: if there is only one arts-educated group (Ekphrasis), then it is likely that it will consider all or most works produced by members of this group as ‘acceptable’ and ‘good’. And if there are only two or three arts-educated groups, they are still likely to approve more easily of works created by their members and to criticize (reject or ridicule) the works of individuals within the other groups. If, however, there were many, many groups of arts-educated people; then the individuals producing the art-related works would be more likely to conceptualize themselves as ‘an artist, who is also a member of one of many arts-related groups’ rather than ‘an artist from art-related group A rather than art-related group B or C’.<br />Therefore, in order to protect the integrity and objective evaluations of an artist’s works by other artists, it appears necessary that little emphasis be placed on belonging to a group or not; and if an artist does belong to a group, that little emphasis be placed on the specific group to which they belong. In closing, then, Ekphrasis may benefit most not by having all Christian artists create and present their works through this group, but by being content to remain relatively small.<br /><br />After all, if works of art (paintings, drawings, writings, musical pieces, etc.) are fueled by the individuality of the artist (as I believe most are), it seems counter-productive for all the creative individuals within an area to mold themselves into a single group, which will inevitably begin eroding the individuality of each member to form a cohesive whole. Therefore, small groups may be beneficial for receiving encouragement to continue in one’s artistic endeavors (i.e. a discouraged artist is revived when they hear others are interested in the work they are doing), but throwing too many artists into a single group is likely to hold all members back by lowering the standards for what is considered ‘acceptable’ and ‘good’ (because no one wants to discourage or hurt the other’s feelings).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22560219.post-27255093500910781972012-03-05T15:42:35.979-05:002012-03-05T15:42:35.979-05:00Concerning Ekphrasis’ goal as stated: “to be THE p...Concerning Ekphrasis’ goal as stated: “to be THE place where ALL Christians-in-the-Arts in the Lehigh Valley workshop their pieces & performances—and to produce some of THE great masterpieces of our time!”, I’m not sure this is actually desirable. The reason I say this is because whenever there is a group of people, the tendency is for the members of that group to all gravitate towards each other in many ways (i.e., they assimilate each other’s preferences, opinions, etc.) in order to preserve the cohesion of the single, larger unit. <br />I believe this predisposition of individuals towards groupthink becomes problematic for a few reasons within the context of Ekphrasis:<br /><br />1.If “monthly workshops for critique” is a large portion of what Ekphrasis aims to be (i.e. a Christian community of arts-related people objectively evaluating the works of their fellow group members), the psychology principle of groupthink suggests that individuals within the group will struggle to remain objective and voice their true dissentions concerning the works of their peers.<br /><br />2.Additionally, the individuals within the group are likely to develop a mindset that interprets their art-related works as ‘good’ and ‘acceptable’, while labeling art-related works created by those outside the group as ‘bad’ and ‘unacceptable’. Perhaps not to the extreme (i.e., a Da Vinci work will still be considered ‘good’ regardless of whether he was within the group or not), but the tendency towards approving more highly of works created by those within the group and analyzing more critically works created by those outside the group must certainly exist and wreak very real havoc on the opinions of the group.<br /><br />All this to say psychology research supports the idea that a group of collective individuals will struggle to remain objective concerning both their works and others, and therefore if objective feedback is the key (as I believe most would argue it is), it must necessarily be provided by a source that is outside the group. To this end, then, there must necessarily exist at least one other group of individuals who are qualified to evaluate such works but who do not themselves belong to Ekphrasis. Indeed, a single group of art-educated people outside Ekphrasis who may be relied on to objectively judge Ekphrasis’ work is not ideal, as they will themselves be predisposed towards judging Ekphrasis’ work more harshly than their own. Therefore, it is ideal that many arts-educated groups exist outside Ekphrasis, in order that the power of each group be minimalized.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com