A monument can be many things. The Eiffel tower and The Holocaust Museum in Washington D.C. are two examples of extremely effective monuments that are completely different. The Eiffel is a multi-faceted monument, symbolizing more than one point in French History. The visitor can thusly, make his or her own interpretation because it’s not a representational image of image of a certain point of French History. In my opinion, I think it may be easier to remember what the monument is supposed to represent because the image is so striking.
The Holocaust museum in D.C. also uses striking imagery to help people remember the Holocaust. Although, the imagery is definitely more grounded in realism the images being shown aren’t necessarily the grossest and goriest images. They are more clever in their depiction of the event, making it easier to remember.
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
This study looked at the differences between men and women in their mapmaking. They looked specifically to see how different factors of the person they were directing with the map would affect their mapmaking. They were given a description of the wayfarer based on gender, age, and familiarity with the campus, and those making the maps had ranked themselves according to familiarity with the campus and confidence that their map would get the wayfarer to the destination without difficulty. They were either asked to draw a simple route or a complex route.
The results were fairly unsurprising. Men's maps seemed to be more detailed and helpful, and more often included cardinal values. They were also more confident. They thought this may be because men are stereotypically more associated with maps.
I decided to pick this article because we had just read the one on how blind children navigated. The article did not focus, however, on whether the person asking for directions was foreign or of the same. This seems like a more pressing matter in the world in terms of a lost person in a different country, rather than someone who just wants to find something on a campus community where there are, typically, maps anyway.
Thursday, March 03, 2011
Sorry this is a day late... but I wanted to spark an argument and see what you get from this article. It comes from Nigel Barber, who received his Ph.D. in Biopsychology from Hunter College, and teaches Psychology at Bemidji State University and Birmingham Southern College.
He discusses the developmental terms of the creative genius, (you and I), but I feel like this article which is on the Psychology Today Blog, is completely misdirected. It accounts for the classic, "hard life, deep emotional artist" case; claiming that people who grew up in comfortable homes are intelligent but less likely to be creative. I agree this could be a trend, but I feel the diversity in the art world is very difficult to write about and this is just an attempt at dissecting it. Its hard to say what developmental factors led to our creative genius, but I think each kid has the chance to hold a cheap crayon when they are little and it may be a hit with them or it may not, its just a personal difference.
I am a twin, both my brother and I drew/colored when we were little, I was the one who just continued, because I got something else out of it, instead of him.