I don't ordinarily write a response to just a single reading, but my response is so strong that I felt compelled to.
First of all, you can't necessarily say that Coke and Pepsi are exactly alike, only differentiated by packaging. Now, to me, sure they are, but I don't particularly care for soda. However, they are made by two different companies. And while I'm sure they're similar, I'm equally certain that they're not exactly the same. And if people get more excited about one or the other, because of the packaging? Where's the harm in that?
The critics of "surface," who claim that it erodes the "Puritan values" capitalism was built on . . . really? You're going to connect religion and economy? While the two certainly influence each other, I do not believe it is right to demand that they work together. Certainly, our country was founded on at least Protestant ideals, but we are by no means the only country with capitalism. Capitalism exists in Muslim countries, Buddhist/Hindu countries, Catholic countries, etc. It's absolutely ridiculous to shun design and fashion because it influences capitalism away from Puritan values.
It was also argued that all surfaces deceive. They all tell lies, manipulate consumers, and detract from content. Certainly, this is sometimes the case. But definitely not always. There are many very functional products that also happen to look nice. Like my new flooring. It does the job of being a floor very well. My allergies have decreased since putting it in (we had carpet), it's much easier to clean, and it certainly withstands walking very well. It also looks really nice, which I consider a good thing. As far as manipulating the consumer, and getting them to spend more? Go for it. If people can't realize that they have no use for the thing they're buying, then they deserve to spend more money. Actually, the way some of the views were expressed, made me wonder if the people expressing them had been "deceived" into buying something worthless and pretty.
Now, the minister worrying about aesthetics taking away from worship, that I can get. He can worry about that - it's relevant. However, some of the most beautiful things in the world have been created because the artists were inspired by religion. Handel's Messiah, The Sistine Chapel, and the vast majority of Bach's works are great examples. If I were religious, I imagine my faith would be enhanced by experiencing them. Who knows, maybe today's Christian rock bands will be tomorrow's Bach?
I have definitely seen my fair share of movies that are more special effects than anything else. Take Avatar, for example. It wasn't a bad film; it was actually pretty good. But I don't feel it deserved all the hype it got from actual substance. It got that hype because of the special effects. Sometimes, though, you just want to see something pretty. Or as my husband says about Transformers, "Sometimes you want a compelling film that makes you think and changes the way you feel. And sometimes you just want to see giant robots wailing on each other." Then there are undoubtedly movies that are very good, in and of themselves, but also have great special effects. I'm not a huge movie-watcher, so I don't have an example, but I'm sure there are.
Maybe I've got it easy with my own looks. I'm okay looking, not gorgeous, not ugly. And quite frankly, I don't have the time, patience, or energy to care about my hair, clothes, shoes, or makeup. So I get my hair cut on a semi-regular basis, make sure it's short and I won't have to worry about it, and otherwise take the stylist's recommendations. I buy clothes that while they're not "in style," they don't look horrible. I have a pair of serviceable boots that I wear everywhere, and I wear jeans. I simply do not wear makeup. And if some people don't like me for it? So what. I've got better friends that don't care. What if I lose customers over it? Big deal. I have plenty of students, and always appreciate more time. My students pay me for my expertise, not to look at my face. If that's what they care about, they won't worry about my looks. If they don't care about my expertise, then I don't really want them as students. But luckily, I was warned by my teachers that I would have to pay attention to my looks, so I got into the business prepared.
I don't understand why people are freaking out about other people spending more on surface. If I want to spend $50 to get my nails done, well, that's my decision, and I'll make that decision on my own. If I needed to spend that money on something else, then sure, I'd forgo the nails. I have often enough. But I see no need to worry about how someone else is delegating their resources - that's their business, not mine. The argument that surfaces are all about status is just bogus. Sure, I'm happier that my floor is nicer so when I'm teaching out of the home my students will see a nicer home. But I wanted these floors long before I decided I wanted to teach out of my home, and never thought any of my students would see them. I love my new floor for itself - both the function, and the form. However, I just realized that Frank's ideal world where everything was drab, does indeed exist. The Amish have all agreed to wear drab colored clothes, eschew music, and only invest in function.
"A bad person can be beautiful or create beautiful things." (pg 90) Case in point: Wagner. He created some truly beautiful and moving music, but his character was not exactly the best. He was Hitler's favorite composure, which should give you an idea.
So, what does all of this have to do with teaching? Other than directly, what I've already mentioned, a lot. If we, as teachers, can take valuable content, but package it in a way that is pleasing to our students, they will learn more. For example, I used to teach solely from the Suzuki books. I happen to really like the music, but not all my students do. Now, I encourage students to play other music, music they find fun. It has occurred to me that it really doesn't matter what they play. Any music they play will only contribute to their education. And actually, a lot of popular music is written in more difficult keys, with more accidentals, and weird, difficult-to-count rhythms. So it really stretches my students, sometimes more than the "traditional" lesson music. And, because they find it fun, and find intrinsic value in playing popular music, they practice more, learn more, and become better musicians. All through "fun" music.
No comments:
Post a Comment