I thought they did a better job than that at TC.   The layers that you don't
believe exists in teaching are the substance of art, even commercial art
(and monumental simplicities like architecture that are meant to be
practically used).   Sometimes its hard to get architects beyond the craft
element and into the kinds of theories that the architects of movement
(choreographers) live with on a daily basis.   Sometimes even the composers
suffer from architecturalitus.    A while back,  they were so resistant to
thinking beyond the envelope that the dancers took the peer group grants
away from them at the NEA until the Republican "know nothings" took over and
rescued the poor souls.    Its hard to help composer sometimes, even the
greatest.   But painters, dancers, stage directors, actors and singer actors
as well as film directors and writers all know the layered reality I
described with the teacher.   There are even exercises for it.

I would simply say that if Alexander's teacher wasn't doing what I said or
if those teachers were doing what you said then they didn't know teaching
and were incompetant.   On the other hand I have had many little games that
I played as a student come round to show me my foolishness when I had to
deal with the same issues with my students.   I thought I was smart but my
conclusions were adolescent.   Only having to teach them and figure them out
from the other side taught me how wrong I had been.  Sadly, most of my
teachers have been right.

What a pity that you never encountered a master.    I've known many in my
lifetime and I have no doubt that they meant to do what they did and that
they made mistakes deliberately in order to stimulate my laziness and
develop discipline within me.   How do I know, because for five years I had
to write a year lesson plan one year in advance and a report on every single
lesson I taught that explained how I was doing it and how it worked.   My
teacher used my lesson plan and taught every other week and he showed me how
to teach my own words.   On my week to teach, he critiqued my work and on
his week I analyzed and studied his.    I was graded both on the performance
of the student and the elegance of the work.   Obviously pedagogy has a
different meaning to you.

I call those things you hate, academic intellectual games.   They are a
result of a one sided pedagogy that does not include performance practice or
creativity.   People who have simply been taught intellectual visual games
are not equipped to deal with it.   Just as performing artists often aren't
willing to give up the pleasure of art to do the kind of artistic work in
academic exercises because the feedback is so deadening.    The deadened
ones aren't really very good at the creative discipline, they can't stand
the chaos and improvisation, while the ones who control the improvisation
and chaos with discipline find drudgery too negative a feedback to build
desire.   The key is time.   Rhythm.   In architecture it is the engineering
root that holds up the roof.   Trying to both be an engineer and an artist
at the same time is to join both time and timelessness in rhythm.   That is
the problem of architecture and I'm surprised that Alexander still tells the
story.   Not doing the assignment is an act of laziness.   Resenting doing
it is an act of immaturity.    Doing it and going beyond is an act of
artistry.   I don't trust where Alexander has arrived no matter how strong
the talent or the fame.   In music we are a lot more at home with the
gatekeeper position held by the teacher because so few of us are able to
work and earn a living.   If so few architects worked then those who helped
us succeed would be held in more esteem.


REH


----- Original Message -----
From: "Brad McCormick, Ed.D." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Ray Evans Harrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, July 13, 2003 6:44 PM
Subject: Re: [Futurework] And now for something completely different: A
recently deceased emperor's new clothes


> Ray Evans Harrell wrote:
>
> > Brad,
> > Artists make the mistake of constantly misreading teachers.    Teachers
take
> > chances as well.   If the teacher was a good one then the comment says
more
> > about Christopher Alexander's artistic blocks as a student than about
the
> > teacher's artistic point of view.    Students project off of me all the
> > time.   "Transference" was not invented by psycho-therapists and
> > psycho-therapy is in reality simply unteaching bad teaching in the first
> > place.
>
> This looks like a Gestalt psychology multi-reading picture/
>
> Do you honestly think that teacher was thinking anything
> like what you attribute to him?
>
> I had a sort of similar instance.  I had a philosophy
> teacher who thought I was "puerile".  On one assignment --
> the only time I ever tried such a think in
> my whole schooling --, I wrote a paper which
> I did not believe in at all, but which I thought
> the teacher would like.  The grad asst gave me a 96.
> The teacher, Sterling Professor of Philosophy Paul Weiss,
> scratched out the 96 and replaced it with a 97.
>
> No, I think what was going on with Alexander is that
> the teacher didn't have a clue as to what anything
> meant, but he was adept at playing the game that had
> got him his Professorship.  So he could not tell
> a serious spoof (not some fraternity prank!) from
> something real.  To borrow LeCorbusier's words,
> he had eyes but saw not and ears but did not hear.
>
> I think you give this dude too much credit.
>
> --
>
> On the other hand, I think you are onto a
> very important issue about being the transference
> object for students.  I had one teacher who said
> to me: "At first I took the way you acted toward me
> personally.  But I can take being used as an
> intellectual punching bag by students." (He said it
> better than that, but it's almost 20 years ago not.)
>
> >
> > I read artists and art critics misreading the events they describe all
the
> > time.   I read an article by the art critic Hilton Kramer sometime ago
where
> > a prominent French art dealer, who "knew better," used words to make a
fool
> > of Kramer for profit.   It was so subtle that Kramer didn't get it and
later
> > published the conversation as if it meant something else.    Kramer
couldn't
> > imagine that the son of one of the world's greatest painters would treat
him
> > so shabbily so he chose the less obvious interpretation to the event and
put
> > it in print making an idiot of himself.
>
> (There is more to the surface than meets the eye, again?)
>
> >
> > I'm reminded of one of those anonymous quotes, maybe you even know who
> > anonymous is:
> >
> >  "To admit you were wrong is to declare you are wiser now than before."
>
> I prefer to put it this way: I identify with the
> factual correctness or lack thereof, of no first-order
> theories.  I identify with the process of critiquing
> the process of [whatever I am doing].
>
> You succinctly summarized the thesis of Hegel's Phenomenology,
> the basic principle of which is that to determine the
> "X is wrong" is not just nothing, but rather it is to
> make certain substantive claims about what the world is
> like.  To study all the aspects of the experience
> of finding out that something X is wrong
> teaches a lot about a lot more things than X.  It is
> the basis of the growth of human cultural life toward
> comprehensive self-accountability and self-creation
> (here we connect with Husserl).
>
> --
>
> To think that Alexander's teacher had any such thoughts
> seems to me at best "highly speculative".
>
> But he is only case study material for us.  May we
> get somehing unsful for our lives out of "him"!
>
> Yes, a good teacher is a transference object (if one likes
> that psychoanalytic term).  And he (or she) does not
> strike back at the student for not being adulated
> by the student!
>
> \brad mccormick
>
> >
> >
> > regards,
> >
> > REH
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Brad McCormick, Ed.D." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Sunday, July 13, 2003 3:02 PM
> > Subject: [Futurework] And now for something completely different: A
recently
> > deceased emperor's new clothes
> >
> >
> >
> >>Of course I -- I don't know about you -- "enjoy"
> >>taking pot shots at Postmodernism since I can't
> >>capitalize myself enough to be able to
> >>just ignore it....
> >>
> >>But postmodernists aren't the only pompous -sses
> >>in this world.  Sokal and Bricemont, with their
> >>article on the political correctness property of
> >>quarks (or whatever it was), did not discover
> >>something new in the world, only new instances of it.
> >>
> >>Here's something from yesterday's NYT about
> >>Christopher Alexander's architecture education
> >>back before pomo:
> >>
> >>     Asked as part of one assignment [when he was
> >>     studying architecture at Cambridge University]
> >>     to design a house, he instead submitted a spoof
> >>     of the formalist theory he had been taught:
> >>     a glass box slashed by giant brick walls.
> >>     "A completely abstract, pointless notion,"
> >>     he said. To his amazement, the head of the
> >>     department called him into his office to
> >>     congratulate him. "He said, 'Christopher, my
> >>     boy, this is exactly what we want,'" Mr. Alexander
> >>     recalled. "I thought, Oh my God, I've walked
> >>     into the nut house."
> >>               (Emily Eakin, "Architecture's Irascible
> >>                Reformer", NYT, 12Jul03, p.B7,9.)
> >>
> >>\brad mccormick
> >>
> >>--
> >>   Let your light so shine before men,
> >>               that they may see your good works.... (Matt 5:16)
> >>
> >>   Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21)
> >>
> >><![%THINK;[SGML+APL]]> Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>-----------------------------------------------------------------
> >>   Visit my website ==> http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>Futurework mailing list
> >>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
> >
> >
>
>
> --
>    Let your light so shine before men,
>                that they may see your good works.... (Matt 5:16)
>
>    Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21)
>
> <![%THINK;[SGML+APL]]> Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>    Visit my website ==> http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/
>
>

_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to