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:

Fri, 1 Aug 2008 11:42:23 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (147 lines)

Hey David -

I think when we discuss the dumbing down of information we have to  
take reality into consideration.  I think I'll probably offend a few  
people in here so i apologize in advance.

Just as newspapers are becoming a thing of the past so is the way we  
used to interact with information.  I was lucky to be part of a book  
project for McGraw-Hill, as an illustrator/co-author on a higher-ed  
geology textbook called Exploring Geology. (Cindy Shaw was also a huge  
contributor).  We took the approach to present each chapter as a  
series of two page spreads with each spread depicting a topic or  
concept.  This information was followed and built on when you turned  
the page and delved into the next two page spread.  The entire book  
was done this way, leading us to take away the highest honor at McGraw- 
Hill this year for a textbook.  And this book is centered and built  
around robust illustration.

I feel that when we use terms like dumbing down materials we miss an  
important point.  We live in an world where people and kids in  
particular deal with huge amounts of information in ways we could not  
conceive of when most of us were that age.  Dumbing down has a  
negative connotation that I think makes a subtle implication that kids  
today are somehow less intelligent then we were at their age.  That's  
very far from the truth in my opinion.  The fact is that kids deal  
with things on a different level than we do - and in many cases (IMHO)  
are becoming more right brained because of sorting through a world  
that stimulates the visual side of their brains.

The book we designed was visually based in how it teaches.  It uses  
illustrations to get the concept across quickly and used text that was  
succinct and clearly written.  The concept was that we live in a  
society where we compete with the likes of youtube, IMs, texting,  
games, TV and too many ways to gather information to name here.  Kids  
today are bombarded with information and stimulation - as illustrators  
and educators I feel we need to appeal to the kids in a way that makes  
sense to them and makes them slow down enough to stop and learn.   
Dividing a book into two pages spreads was a simple idea and now it's  
a proven way to do that due to McGraw-Hill is following this idea with  
more of their books.

I feel the book only builds on what we all do here in the guild - we  
use illustrations to teach and communicate and express ourselves. I  
think you have to work this way to deal effectively with everything  
else that is also out there competing for attention. It's a changing  
world and is getting only stranger as new and faster means of  
information become even more ingrained into society.

Our job as illustrators and artists is to do work that conveys  
information in a way that society can relate to.  We need to be better  
than our materials and think that each and every illustration we do  
will rise above some of the more mediocre materials as you stated.  We  
are some of the creators of this new media and we have to take  
responsibility for the stuff that is fluff and bereft of information.

I hear you in your feeling that people are a whole lot smarter then  
people give them credit for - I also work in the console game  
industry.  And we get kids who come in to work as artists who can do  
things with the software that is frankly unbelievable.  Some of these  
kids cannot draw to save their lives - but give them ZBrush and tell  
them to model something and the work produced is amazing in it's depth  
and content.  They see things in ways we could not imagine just 10  
years ago, with a keener eye in some ways then many of us in this  
forum.  But their talent can be raw in nature.  Their whole world is  
now based around visual learning and playing and communication.

In many ways I think kids almost communicate iconically.  It's how  
they dress with logos and expressions on their clothes - their text  
messages are iconic in that they have almost done away with words.   
Pictures and videos are reference points for them to communicate ideas  
and concepts.  And while a good lot of this is pretty shallow - the  
sheer amount of data they process is amazing.  Just watch your kids  
text or use myspace or the internet in general.  Or better yet watch  
how they play games - especially online games and how they build  
communities in ways that are visually and audio based, far beyond the  
things we did as kids.

It's not that it's bad or good - it just is and we need to live in  
this world and build a better way for us to communicate what is  
important for them when they need to learn something.  We have the  
tools to do this - we just need to use them and try to get a better  
understanding of the world they live in and be able to show them some  
depth can be had if we do our jobs right and help them slow down when  
needed.  We need to embrace our audience and cater to them in ways  
that is not dumbed down nor infers a lowered expectation for their  
abilities. I'M NOT AN EDUCATOR NOR EDUCATED -  just a self taught  
illustrator. So I can't speak to how you perceive students in your  
class - but I do look at my kids, and work with some very innovative  
authors, artists and illustrators and feel that today we have to  
change how we think and this means adapting to a slippery surface  
where education is.

And those changes don't involve dumbing down anything... just  
presenting it in ways the audience better comprehends it.

Maybe we should have a myspace or Facebook presence and see what  
happens?  We might try to get down into the trenches and see where it  
goes.  Just a thought and then watch and learn.  There is nothing that  
says that those communities are just venues for advertising movies,  
music or personalities... why not interject some science in there too?

Sorry - getting off my horse now.

Chuck



On Aug 1, 2008, at 10:33 AM, David Clarke wrote:

> On Aug 1, 2008, at 8:40 AM, Bruce Bartrug wrote:
>
> think you've already selected the direction you want to go, ...
>
>
> Hi Mieke,
>
> I have to agree with Bruce, you sound like you've got a great idea  
> brewing already. For a critical point, you might consider looking at  
> how the new media has changed society, its expectations and our  
> communications vis-a-vis science illustration. I work in education  
> (so maybe I'm a little biased or warped in my view) and many of my  
> colleagues and many folks I have spoken with in other "educational"  
> endeavors (e.g., museums, national parks)  are complaining about the  
> dumbing down of all materials presented.
>
> There are of course exceptions to this (Cosmocyte's work for the  
> Food Detective, for example) but it seems that while the new media  
> has enabled us to share our knowledge much easier  and  
> "democratized" communications somewhat, it has also lowered our  
> expectations of audience intelligence. [I realize "thems are  
> fighting words" but I could fill a football field with folks with  
> examples.] I don't know whether the abundance of new media  
> (animation, tv, games) have shrunk our attention spans so that  
> deeper thought has become hard work or if we the creators are  
> anticipating a dumbing down that we then are creating. Before you  
> think me a real prig, I think folks tend to be a whole deal smarter  
> than we give them credit and I push to challenge our students as  
> much as I can.
>
> Anyway, my point, Mieke, was that you might want to consider not  
> only the upside of the new media and its effect on a resurgence in  
> science illustration but it's downside also.
>
> It sounds like a wonderful opportunity. Good luck!
>
> -david clarke

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

December 2022
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