After looking at the video of my partner and I, I felt that we could have discussed the term “abject” further opening up the discussion to help discover what the class thought abject meant. We also could have structured our questions to help scaffold the discussion more building from interpretation to a deeper meaning and understanding of the work we were showing and the principle we were using.
From the feedback our peers gave, they felt that we should have paid more attention to bringing back the theme after discussing the work, and talked more about what facing the abject was. In regards to the presentation of two works on one slide the group felt a little divided. Some felt showing Kiki Smiths work next to Justin Novak’s was helpful in exploring the comparison and contrast between the two artists. However some felt that we should have first showed one sculpture and then shown the other. Only after discussing both images would it been helpful to show both side by side. In response to your question of why we showed both images side by side, we felt that it would be helpful showing them this way to discuss the theme facing the abject as a whole, and also due to the time constraint we felt showing both would expose the group to both artists pushing along our discussion. Other comments made by our peers were directed toward our presence at the front of the room. Some stated that we looked nervous or that we should have moved around more. Upon reviewing the video we agree with these comments. Another comment was that we should have discussed the theme it’s self more in order to build an understanding before we looked at the artist work, also asking what was abject in regard to the work shown and built a discussion around that a little more.
Over all our peers felt that the artists we choose suited the theme as well as each other and that the discussion was helpful in beginning to think about the theme facing the abject.
No comments:
Post a Comment