Week 5 Activity: Collections - 89 views
started by Myoungsun Sohn on 09 Feb 09
started by Myoungsun Sohn on 09 Feb 09
started by Myoungsun Sohn on 09 Feb 09
started by Myoungsun Sohn on 09 Feb 09
The only limitation that I can identify is that artwork tends to have a greater impact when viewed in person, and by viewing artwork through Posse students may not fully experience the art.
2. It was interesting to compare my aesthetics to others in the web 2.0 group. I enjoy black & white abstract contemporary artwork. I also am drawn to images that remind me of Munch's "The Scream" (I'm not sure why :)
Viewing the artwork selected by others tells you more about their unique personalities.
Myoungsun Sohn wrote:
> 1. What you perceive as potentials and limitations of using Posse in your teaching?
>
> 2. What you learned about yourself and others in the group from the collections project?
The main limitation I found with Posse was the fact the images were so small due to copyright issues. They didn't provide the same amount of detail to look an actually experience the paintings. For this reason, I may suggest that this could be used after a museum visit or viewing the pieces in a slideshow or in a larger format.
2. I learned that I really tend to lean towards black and white photography when viewing the collection. I appreciated all of the artwork that was available on the site, but I really enjoyed the different photographs. I also seem to have an attraction to contemporary artwork. It was fun to see the different galleries created and see who had what images in common. I also liked reading everyone's creative names!
Myoungsun Sohn wrote:
> 1. What you perceive as potentials and limitations of using Posse in your teaching?
>
> 2. What you learned about yourself and others in the group from the collections project?
I'm also struck by the differences in all of our collections. Although we are using art made by other people, we arrange it in a way that is unique to only us as individuals. It's interesting how we can filter information to reflect our personalities. Rob's photo I think is a perfect example of this.
The Brooklyn Museum's utilization of the web is by no means perfect. There can be no substitute for seeing art in person. However, while the mediation of the computer screen is certainly a drawback, I consider it to be a forgivable offense as most people understand that seeing a painting as a five-inch square on a computer screen is not the same as being in the same space as it. What impresses me about this use of Web2.0 is the ease of discovering work that I was previously unaware of. I think the Brooklyn Museum achieved its goal of getting me interested in new work. And there are a couple items that I just might have to check out next time I'm in the area.
Myoungsun Sohn wrote:
> 1. What you perceive as potentials and limitations of using Posse in your teaching?
>
> 2. What you learned about yourself and others in the group from the collections project?
1) Posse encourages the user to collect images. How is this like consuming images? What criteria should be set forth for a collection? Should the images relate to one another? Should the images share a common theme or context? Is their an opportunity for the user to comment or reflect on the process of curating a collection.
2) What does it mean to be a "collector?" Is this act of collecting images different in cyberspace than in the museum space? How?
3) What are the goals of the Brooklyn Museum in providing this Web resource? Who is the intended audience? How have they encoded the process of collecting? How can the user interact with this in the ways intended? What are the possibilities for interacting with this technology in un-intended ways? And what might a student learn in either case?
I learned that Karen, Lindsay, and I are all fascinated with chairs and images of chairs. I too, have a large collection of pictures of chairs. I created a monoprint series during my masters study that was partly about image of chairs. I miss making art in the intense and sustained way as I was.
Myoungsun Sohn wrote:
> 1. What do you perceive as potentials and limitations of using Posse in your teaching?
>
> 2. What have you learned about yourself and others in the group from the collections project?
Part 3 was like shopping for me, being a consumer. We will consider consuming and art education during Hongkyu's week of facilitation coming up, Feb. 16-23. It was fun and enticing to create an identity through my choices for this particular group.
I don't think part 4 worked as well as it was intended because participants either did not know about how to layout the page with using tables to design, or to look back at revisions, or the purpose of part 4. Revisits were needed to rearrange as more images were added. However, the potential of part 4 is the heart of the relational theory that Myoungsun is exploring in that this is when the individual is in relationship to others. I think the purpose was to recreate from a representative piece from each but in a way that new relationships would be VISIBLE using the potentials of google.doc not as a blog thread or linear listing but as a document that gets changed again and again with its history (revisions) visible--like a never static, always changing, palimpsest collective identity.
Myoungsun Sohn wrote:
> 1. What do you perceive as potentials and limitations of using Posse in your teaching?
>
> 2. What have you learned about yourself and others in the group from the collections project?
The purpose of this activity was to experience a specific educational material, the Posse, together and take a close look at it as a teaching and learning material within the Web 2.0 pedagogy. Finally, it was to bring a variety of issues generated by those experiences into our forum.
In fact, as Brian said, the Brooklyn Museum's online community, including the Posse, is not a perfect example. However, it might be a valuable trial for visitors in the way to provide visitor-centered experiences online on the basis of the museum' resources, just as recently most of museums try to do it. Among a variety of methods to build online community, the reason why I chose the Posse is that it looked easy to be accustomed to use-by searching, tagging, and commenting-and apply in real art educational settings in different perspectives.
I recreated your responses as a big picture. As many of you said, it is not easy that an educational material, itself perfectly works in every educational setting. In one hand, even though it might sound skeptic, we can consider a great deal of possibility from the weaknesses in the other hand-like the thing that we can expect synergy effects by supplementing a material with others.
For Our Understanding to the Posse
STRENGTHS:
√ RELATIONALITY
#Between users and works of art
* It encompasses comparing and categorizing artworks in different themes, and further creating each viewer's perspective in relation with their identities, values, lived experiences to works of art (Hongkyu).
* The idea of collection represents an individual's online identity to works of art (Jennifer).
* I became more engaged in playing the "play tag" game, and in tagging individual works. For me, this is the real strength of this web page, and in Web 2.0 in general. The ability to add the viewers' input into the search field makes the artwork "theirs" on a more personal level. It also leads to more rhizomatic exploration and I found a number of works I wouldn't have normally searched for (Robert)
* Artists are for disclosing the extraordinary in the ordinary. They are for transfiguring the commonplace, as they embody their perceptions and feelings and understandings in a range of languages, in formed substance of many kinds. They are for affirming the work of imagination-the cognitive capacity that summons up the "as if," the possible, the what is not and yet might be. They are for doing all this in such a way as to enable those who open themselves to what they create to see more, to hear more, to feel more, to attend to more facets of the experienced world (Greene, 1987, p. 14, cited in Ellizabeth).
* Posse helps me to reveal my uniqueness by collecting artworks I like (Min Jung)
* I chose artworks for my collection deliberately with a unique own point of view. Through this collecting process, I came to have a deep affection with my collection. In addition, by sharing and displaying on web again, it makes me to change the stereotype which arts exhibit in the museum or the galleries (Minkyoung)
# Between users
* I particularly enjoyed the narratives that developed in some of our online collections with a series of related images and then a title that reflected on the collection. This could be an accessible way to create a visual dialogue between individuals (Elizabeth)
* It was fun to see the different galleries created and see who had what images in common. I also liked reading everyone's creative names (Ashley)
* In looking at Mary Elizabeth's collection I clicked on a few to learn more and this opened to the larger image, and synopsis about the piece, and video presentation about the work. Interesting that the oldest work in the Brooklyn collection that you selected is a hybrid (bird and woman), which connects to some reading you have been doing regarding Haraway's Cyborg manifesto--see http://www.brooklynmuseum.org/opencollection/objects/4225/Female_Figure (Karen)
* I could read friends' taste and know their interest through their collection, which reveal their own uniqueness. I could also share friends' unique awarenesses which I missed or could not recognize (Min Jung).
* Sharing and displaying on web again made me to change the stereotype which arts exhibit in the museum or the galleries (Minkyoung)
* It is interesting to see other people's collection. I agree with Jennifer that the collection tells you about the person. That's why my collection title is randomized personal. This is also true with Web 2.0 (Christine)
√ ACCESSIBILITY
* The information with artworks makes me understand the artworks more comfortably and easily at home (Min Jung)
* It allows the user to remain more anonymous, and students may feel more comfortable interacting with each other in social networking environment (Jennifer)
* It is a great pre / post-visit activity (Ashley)
WEAKNESSES:
√ No INTERACTIVE DIRECTIONS
* Creating the collections is fun, but I think many students would benefit from more direction about the type of collection to create (Robert)
* I noticed that my use of Posse was related to my ability to follow the directions given for this assignment (Elizabeth)
√ REPRODUCTIVITY
* The main limitation I found with the Posse was the fact some of the images were so small due to copyright issues (Ashley)
* You are limited by the reproduction in terms of size, details, colors, and viewing angles (Michelle)
* Students might not recognize the difference between real and copied/virtual art work (Min Kyoung)
For digging our activity deeply
Dr. Keifer-Boyd points that the fourth activity did not work well as follows:
I don't think part 4 worked as well as it was intended because participants either did not know about how to layout the page with using tables to design, or to look back at revisions, or the purpose of part 4. Revisits were needed to rearrange as more images were added. However, the potential of part 4 is the heart of the relational theory that Myoungsun is exploring in that this is when the individual is in relationship to others. I think the purpose was to recreate from a representative piece from each but in a way that new relationships would be VISIBLE using the potentials of google.doc not as a blog thread or linear listing but as a document that gets changed again and again with its history (revisions) visible--like a never static, always changing, palimpsest collective identity.
I agree with her and think that we need to revisit our understanding on the strengths and weaknesses of the Posse above mentioned. Regardless of the Posse, I think that there are most of reasons why it happened.
For more discussion by Mary Elizabeth
* Posse encourages the user to collect images. How is this like consuming images?
* What criteria should be set forth for a collection? Is there an opportunity for the user to comment or reflect on the process of curating a collection?
* What does it mean to be a "collector"?
* What are the goals of the Brooklyn Museum in providing this Web resource? How can the user interact with this in the ways intended? What are the possibilities for interacting with this technology in unintended ways? And what might a student learn in either case?
My tags made by reflecting on this activity,
Language
Communication
Delivery
Effectiveness
Manual
Relationality
Interaction
Inter-understanding
PS: I have learned a lot from this facilitation. I appreciate your participation. Personally, I am struggling with distinguishing terms, such as tool, material, resource, program, method, and etc. Thus, if you can see a wrong case for me to use those terms, please let me know. Thank you.