Shoot -- in my last I should have included this Brady excerpt I was
reacting to. One thing I do like about his effort is that it does seem Mike
believes
"understanding" is a matter of degree. And he evades the danger of using the
word 'is' -- that is, he doesn't, despite the implied "degree" measure, try to
specify a point where, say, mere "awaeness of" becomes "understanding".
Which is either a virtue or a fault of his effort depending on how you feel
about
it.
> you can learn a small number of key
> works by style and fixed in a historical chronology, and then learn to
> place other, unmemorized works into the timeline by looking at the
> stylistic qualities of them. This would be hard, rote work at first,
> but, I assured them, that as they learned to see certain properties or
> qualities in the works, they would be able to locate them
> historically. AND, as they expanded their visual skills, they would
> find that they would become more skilled at visual discernment, etc.
>
> The more they knew, the better they could see the works. Ta da,
> understanding.
>
**************
Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with
Tyler Florence" on AOL Food.
(http://food.aol.com/tyler-florence?video=4?&
NCID=aolfod00030000000002)
