LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for SCIART-L Archives


SCIART-L Archives

SCIART-L Archives


SCIART-L@LISTSERV.UNL.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

SCIART-L Home

SCIART-L Home

SCIART-L  August 2008

SCIART-L August 2008

Subject:

Re: Your thoughts please

From:

Charles Carter <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

SciArt-L Discussion List-for Natural Science Illustration- <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Sat, 2 Aug 2008 13:37:32 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (158 lines)

Hey Britt and Frank -

I think we've been moving to this current situation for decades now -  
starting with the advent of Photography (Or earlier).  Back in the  
1970s a writer by the name of Harlan Ellison wrote a book of political  
activism and television criticism called "The Glass Teat".  Part of it  
talked about how people were drawn into watching television and all of  
it's violence, sex and glory (Very milk toast when compared with the  
entertainment of today) and how hours could go by and kids would  
barely remember what they saw much less know how long they sat in  
front of the tube.

A teacher could turn on a TV in a noisy classroom and the kids would  
settle down and just turn their heads and watch it - even if it was  
just static.  Ellison should know about this stuff as he was also a  
prolific television writer (Sci-Fi mostly) and wrote a column for the  
LA Free Press.  Even back then we were talking about the death of  
reading and short attention spans of kids (Of which I was one of them).

Today TV is obviously not the only source of distraction.  I too worry  
about how long kids sit in front of various means of electronic  
entertainment and unknowingly and mindlessly let the world go by.  I  
guess it still comes down to parents and how we raise our kids.  A  
balance has to be struck - but what kind of balance is struck when the  
parents are former gamers themselves and technology users and who play  
games with their kids?

And as for adapting to the new style of learning  - - reaching out to  
the ADD generation?  Well - you have to understand where they are  
coming from to fully engage them and that is the challenge.  As an  
illustrator I have to do work that makes them want to explore an image  
- to be part of the landscape.  I feel in the future, interactive  
media will be the tool that lets them become part of the landscape of  
what ever subject is being taught.  Being it geology, astronomy,  
biology - anything where they can learn by doing and thus learn by  
experience - game technology will be used (And obviously is being  
used) to engage and pull in students to the subject matter.

Before we all start denouncing games in general - you forget that  
games are not like watching TV.  They fully engage your mind and  
senses and in many cases let kids (and adults) be part of larger  
communities that did not exist years ago in who they share the gaming  
experience with.

Games force kids to think - strategize and react to move ahead, level  
up and win.  If you don't believe me sit down with your kids and play  
a strategy game or the World of Warcraft - games are not passive like  
television and in the end I think that is where the answer lays for  
reaching kids now.   We just need to find ways to make the transition  
compelling and that takes time and effort and unfortunately in many  
cases, money.

But games do provide kids with something else - escape and that has  
it's own set of problems.  And of course it's passive in that you are  
just sitting there (Though that is even changing now with the Wii  
leading the way).

Personally I feel television is old school now - being slowly replaced  
by games and interactive experiences.  TV is almost like a niche  
thing.  The networks know this and create reality shows as opposed to  
higher level production styles of entertainment because it's cheaper  
and they have been losing market share for decades to cable and the  
internet.  The Discover channel,  History Channel and many others  
cater to an audience that wants to know stuff and these shows probably  
actually teach to some degree - but they teach with a large amount of  
entertainment value.

My feeling is that many kids have basically moved on and away from TV  
in some cases because games give them a more rewarding and immersive  
experience - one they can enjoy with their friends.

As for cream of the crop -

Britt - I don't think my case is special that I see only the cream of  
the crop.  But if that is the case then we should be even more  
compelled to do what ever it takes to reach that 99% of those other  
kids.  As for the iconography that seems to be replacing the word -  
this has been happening for a long time as David mentioned when we  
used images to define an event - we are now just much further along as  
a society where it's becoming ubiquitous in how kids communicate  
nearly on every level of their lives.  Photography (Or if you follow  
the camera obscura  thesis by Hockney/Falco) - this has been going on  
for a long time moving much more rapidly over the last couple of  
decades as technology has moved ahead so quickly it's virtually  
impossible to keep up with each new change.

Anyway - that's my two bits for Mieke's thesis.  Sorry if I shot  
gunned around the topic.

Chuck





On Aug 1, 2008, at 4:41 PM, Britt Griswold wrote:

> Chuck makes the case for "the New learning style" pretty  
> effectively.  And sometimes the haze of history makes the past look  
> better than it really was.  It is surely different. And the  
> recognition on a more formal level that there are different styles  
> of learning is a good thing for many, many people who fall through  
> the educational cracks.
>
> But....
>
> Have you ever studied the amount of information and concepts that  
> are actually transmitted in a hour of fact based television?  It is  
> appallingly low in my opinion.  The effort expending in keeping it  
> entertaining is huge. One talented person with a word processor can  
> do wonders in passing on information for a hundredth of the cost.   
> When you add a talented illustrator, and a book results, you have  
> covered a vast majority of the learning population. It would take  
> ten times the viewer's time and a hundred times the cost to try and  
> get that same information imparted by video.
>
> Chuck, I wonder if the circles you run in expose you to only the  
> cream of the raw youthful talent that does amazing things with  
> digital art? Those are people with the curiosity and drive that  
> would not let them be stopped no matter what had sparked them (race  
> cars, mountain climbing, chess, etc.)  I worry that for every one of  
> those you see, there are 99 out there whose motivation and curiosity  
> has been sapped by endless hours parked in front of the TV and play  
> station, so that they have wasted 10 years not learning how to find  
> out what they need to make a rich and fulfilling life for  
> themselves.  I am not claiming this is the case, but it is my  
> worry.  I feel I could have been one of those 99, but Art pulled me  
> through, even with just a modicum of talent.  Maybe I am selling the  
> 99 short, but maybe the distractions of an infotainment culture are  
> in fact an overload to the orderly training of the human brain, at  
> least on a mass scale.
>
> The human brain is probably coping by prioritizing the inputs  
> differently. I personally have found the ability to look up almost  
> anything on Google makes me look a whole lot smarter ;-) It is like  
> adding a memory module to my brain. So I don't think about  
> memorizing details as I did when I was younger.  That might not be a  
> good thing in some cases. It can slow execution speed down. But I  
> have enough background acquired the old fashion way to have some  
> judgment on when to believe what I read and when I should suspend  
> judgment and get more information, and when to say it is bunk.  Plus  
> if you don't know what to ask Google, you don't get the answer you  
> need.  That last part is the background you have (by knowing what  
> "EU" stands for.) - that came from reading.  I could not recommend a  
> student substitute 10 times as much video for reading matter as a  
> efficient way to get an education.  Maybe interactive learning could  
> substitute, but the development costs seem much higher than a!
>  good book, maybe that is changing?
>
> I think studies have show that the brain goes into a different mode  
> when being fed video information. It is passive, not active  
> searching. That does not sound good to me.
>
> So I am in a position where I am suspending judgment and seeking  
> more input...
>
> Britt

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997
September 1997
August 1997
July 1997
June 1997
May 1997
April 1997
March 1997
February 1997
January 1997
December 1996
November 1996
October 1996
September 1996
August 1996
July 1996
June 1996
May 1996
April 1996
March 1996
February 1996
January 1996
December 1995
November 1995
October 1995
September 1995

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.UNL.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager