Good, Better, Creative!

I discovered Cuponk today while shopping.  In its simplest form, it's a game where you try to land your ping-pong ball in a cup.  The trickier the shot, the better.  The basic game has been around for years, but it took some clever people at Hasbro to redesign, repackage, and market it as Cuponk.  For about $13, you get a couple of ping-pong balls, some trick cards, and a fancy cup with lights and cool graphics.  I have to admit, I considered buying it.  But then I had a better thought.  I walked over to the sports area and found a box of 36 ping-pong balls for $8.86.  I bought that instead.  I already had a plastic cup at home, and I figured my kids would have more fun designing and painting their own ping-pong balls.  And guess what . . . I was right.  We've spent the last hour sitting around painting ping-pong balls with magic markers and water color paints, which both worked fabulously.  I then sprayed them with a clear acrylic coat to protect the paintings.  And now . . . Let the games begin.

Here are some sample "designer" ping-pong balls, just to give you an idea of what you can do.

photo credits:  dzingeek

One more thought:  I'm considering using this game at school as a filler project.  I think it would be fun to design balls and then trade them or try to win your opponents ball in a bit of friendly competition.  With a little creativity, the possibilities are endless.  :)

Okay, ONE more thought . . . my last, I promise:  I just found a pack of 144 balls for $11.69 from Amazon.  I'm ordering that right now.

The Problem With Education

photo credit: foundphotosl

In order to graduate from high school in Utah, a student must have 24 credits, 18 of which are "core" class requirements.  The course requirements are as follows:  4.0 credits of Language Arts, 3.0 credits of Math, 3.0 credits of science, 2.5 credits of Social Studies, 2.0 credits in Physical Education, and 3.5 credits in Directed Coursework (which includes 1.5 credits in the Arts).  The additional six credits are "electives."  

Utah gubernatorial candidate, Peter Corroon, would like to change that.  He has proposed adding another year of math and reducing electives.  Students would be required to have 22 credits in "core" subjects.  He suggests that his plan will make graduates more employable.  And I have to admit, he may be right . . . if you're looking to hire a mathematician.  Unfortunately, Corroon fails to realize that what education needs today is greater diversity, not a one-size-fits-all solution.  

I do agree with Corroon that there's room for improvement in our math and science programs.  If you study the greatest periods of human advancement (i.e. Ancient Egypt, Classic Greece, Renaissance Italy, The Age of Enlightment, etc.) you'll see that math and science were highly valued by the cultures of the time.  But you'll notice something else . . . art was also of great and perhaps equal value.  If we take a lesson from history, we'll see it's important to diversify education. 

Let's consider, for a moment, Renaissance Italy of the 1400s.  Here we find an explosion of growth and creativity in the arts and sciences, as well as many other disciplines.  There are many possible reasons for this, but one primary cause was the philosophy of Humanism, or the belief that humans have limitless potential for advancement.  This idea sparked a thirst for learning and creativity in all areas of knowledge.  As Leon Battista Alberti (1404 - 1472) put it, "a man can do all things if he will."  The Renaissance became a time of polymaths, or people who were experts in many skill areas.  The most famous polymath is Leonardo da Vinci.  He exemplifies what I consider a "well-educated" person with a broad repertoire of profound skills.  Truly, the Renaissance was a testament of the potential of humans to learn and advance. 

Today, you could argue that things are different, that in our "tech-driven" society workers need to be more specialized and there's no need for polymaths.  And there's some truth to that . . . on an individual basis.  Statistics do show that the more education you have, the more specialized you become, and the more likely you are to be employed.  However, from a sociological perspective, I believe it's dangerous to funnel all of our students into mathematics and science.  I believe the idea of the polymath--ideal yet unrealistic for all individuals--is absolutely applicable and necessary for all societies and civilizations.  It's akin to the theory of evolution, which suggests that the more diverse the gene pool, the more likely a species will adapt and survive.  In a similar fashion, the more diverse the talent pool, the more likely we will see the development of meaningful ideas and products, and the more likely our economy will grow and our societies advance.

It seems to me that the best solution for fixing education is not to force students to take more math and science, but to provide greater opportunities for specialization in a wider range of areas while still in high school.  We need to help our youth discover their talents sooner and to develop them to the fullest.  They say it takes a good 10 years to master a talent.  Let's give our youth a head start.

Hey, DaVinci Art Students!

DaVinci Academy Art Department

As you may know, I teach visual art at DaVinci Academy in Ogden, Utah.  I love it.  I get to teach some of the most talented youth . . . ever.  Many of my students are leaps-and-bounds ahead of where I was when I was their age.  Their potential is amazing.  They are driven, they have something to say, and they are creative.    These are kids who have faced more than their fair share of challenges, and yet, they are still moving forward and excelling.  Art is how they learn, how they express, and how they live. 

Unfortunately, art is one of the most difficult programs to adequately fund.  The cost of art supplies quickly add up and the ability to produce meaningful projects is greatly limited.  And, with the economy crunch, this year is already looking tight.  That's why we are launching the DaVinci Academy Art Department Winter Fundraiser 2010.  Donating is easy, and it's tax deductible.  Small donations are welcome.

10th Grade Student Work

Here's a list of some of the projects that your donation will help fund:  Anatomy for Artists (advanced drawing, college prep course), Sketchbooks for Kids (creativity initiative in which high school students will gather art supplies and provide them to children in under served areas), college portfolio development, student art shows, Shakespeare Competition (acting, music, and visual art), student concerts, two annual student plays, FUSION (an evening of collaborative arts), and more.

For your donation, you will receive a special thank you from DaVinci Academy's art students.  You will also be recognized in all programs printed for this year's art events.

I probably sound like a salesman.  I'm sorry.  But I believe in this cause and the potential of my students.  I hope  you can too.  Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions about DaVinci Academy or the Art Department Fundraiser.

Thank you!

 DaVinci Academy Art Department Winter Fundraiser 2010

The Balancing Act Called Success

Photo by Brent Moore.

In my last post, I wrote about failure.  Now it seems only right that I take some time to address the concept of success.  I was about to call success the opposite of failure, but I don't think it is.  I would rather think of failure as nothing more than success in progress, a WIP for lack of a better term.

So, then, what is success?  How do we define it, especially with regard to creative works?  Is success always an accomplishment of great meaning and popularity, or is it simply the absence of failure?  Or as author Samuel Beckett suggests, is it the process of "fail[ing] better"?

And who or what determines the success of a creative work?  In sports it's easy.  They have games and tournaments, and you win if you score the most points.  In art, there are competitions, but the whole "win or lose" concept doesn't really work.  In my own experience, I've had paintings that have been accepted in one art show, only to get rejected in another.  In such cases, a creative work gets judged by a jury.  It's a process that works well for thinning entries, but it is subjective, which means that one jury's decision will be different from anothers.  And, honestly, that doesn't seem a good way to judge a person's success.

Pschychologist Mihalyi Csikszentmihalyi argues that creativity results from the interaction of three elements, namely "a culture that contains symbollic rules, the person who brings novelty into the symbollic domain, and a field of experts who recognize and validate the innovation" (Creativity, p. 6).  I would like to borrow those three components and rename them simply Culture, Creator, and Audience.  Just as each element contributes to creativity, it also helps us determine the success of a creative work.  The catch here is that each element, in its own way, wants to take all the credit.  For example, an artist (creator) will think he has been particularly creative on his own, but culture will be quick to point out that the artist's work would never have been accepted had not the attitudes and values of the population changed so drastically over the past 50 years.  And the audience (some proclaiming to be experts) will say, we found him first and he is only successful because we value his work.  They will go on bickering in such a way. 

I think the key to becoming successful in creative endeavors is to balance these three elements, to make them work together.  It's when the artist becomes caught up in the "bickering" that his success becomes shaky and fragile.  To illustrate, I'm going to present what I call my "Lucas Theory."  Yes, it might be a bit corny, but it makes a point.  It's basically this . . . the first three Star Wars movies (episodes 4 - 6 ) were good because George Lucas came up with some pretty cool ideas that fit within the culture and were received well by the audience of the time.  He had things pretty well balanced.  But sometime before making Episodes 1 - 3, he became "off-balance."  He focused more on himself as creator and less on the culture and the audience.  In fact, while defending Jar-Jar Binks in an interview, Lucas said, "I can't make a movie for fans."  But of what value is a creative work if it is not made with an audience in mind? 

So, I suggest that the success of a creative work can only be measured when we take into account the ability of its creator, its acceptance within a culture, and its appeal to an audience.  When we give too much weight to any one of the elements we spin off course.  We get a false measurement which results in a false perception of our work.  Balance is vital to a true and enduring success.

Thanks for reading.