November 25, 2008
Painting
At the end of last term one of my most artistically creative friends Philip had an idea for a painting he wanted to create over the summer holidays. He wanted to create a traditional 18thCentury family portrait, but with an ingenius modern twist; that the whole family are fighting!
Today’s lecture got me thinking about the idea of assessment and how I would possibly go about awarding a mark for this painting. Obviously, on first inspection it is absolutely incredible. If I were to assess it according to a set criteria however, would it still achieve as much credit as it would if I were just a passer by who happened to catch a glimpse?
So. Criteria.
- originality of idea
- attention to detail (workmanship)
- effort
- use of materials
As for the first point, yes, the idea is (in my opinion) both original and fantastic. But had it been just a regular non-fighting portrait, would it have scored as highly?
The attention to detail here is absolutely unspeakable. It is a shame that the computerised image is so much smaller than the original painting as some of the detail is lost, but if you look closely, every tiny fragment of the painting uses so many different shades of colour it looks exactly the same as the photo upon which it was based. For example, the tassels on my dress took Philip an entire day to paint. I tried to enlarge the painted section, but not sure if it helps.
I always think that effort is a tricky one. If I had attempted this painting it wouldn’t have been anywhere near as good as Philip’s original, but I would have tried really really hard! Would this have resulted in me getting a similar mark to Philip? Because I don’t think I would have deserved it! Perhaps the ‘detail’ element in itself covers the ‘effort’ category? My version would be unlikely to contain anywhere near as much detail as Philip’s, so does this mean I haven’t tried? Furthermore, Philip’s painting isn’t quite finished. The left hand side is still a pencil drawing. All be it a perfect drawing, it doesn’t tick the box, ‘painting’. Use of materials. Big cross; wrong?
So is it right that Philip loses marks on not being finished and using pencil. And perhaps he would have lost a few for days off he may have taken during the holidays. Surely that reflects a lack of effort? The fact is, it was his own idea, nobody told him what to do or how to do it, so how can we go and tell him he’s wrong? In this way, is it right that children in schools are marked on their creations based on how well they fulfilled the brief?
It seems to me that it is not so much creativity that is assessed in schools; it is art itself as a skills-based subject. Just as in maths you must learn to add up, in art you must learn to draw to scale. The basics. The groundwork. To eliminate assessment in artistic subjects in a world obsessed with grades and results could surely only serve to further crush the already low standing respect it holds within today’s society. I therefore see assessment of the arts as entirely necessary, but not necessarily the assessment of creativity itself.
Filed by sarahlouise at November 25, 2008 under Uncategorized
No comments on this post yet
