Imagination v. intelligence

No, husker, not sweet, revealing. You see, my friend, we have two classes of folks here. The look at me folks, and the look at them folks.

There is a lot to the parables of the Bible..any bible, but in the end the most rewarding and insightful imagination that we all possess is look at us--two by two or one on one.

"..and that one talent which is death to hide, lodged with ME useless..."

Letty, by self-discipline I mean only the ability to do what has to be done when one doesn't feel like doing it.
The phrase, self-discipline, should not be taken literally. There is no self that must be disciplined--as in self-flagellation.

Agreeing with all here. I have to admit some of that post was tongue in cheek in that I don't think I was ever a C student, whatever my flailings lower than that, or not necessarily an A student. JL and I lived and studied before grade inflation in our environs (I think of grade inflation, or good sense, happening around '65.. I left uni in '64.) When I went to university, C was average and most people landed at the balloon part of the curve, average = C. When I took Bacterial Cell Physiology I had the highest grade in the class and it was a B+. Don't ask about some of my chem grades.

my best grades were in college - after I retired from sports

Letty you are so sweet you crack me up...

One thing I did teach in my vocational training classes was work ethic. Did it a lot of different ways, especially role playing and discussion. The biggest way I did it was probably by having high expectations. If I thought they could do it, they were expected to do it, no excuses. This was balanced by a whole lot of positive reinforcement when they DID do it. A lot of these people just hadn't been challenged in their education, hadn't received either of those -- no positive reinforcement when they did achieve, and too readily excused when they didn't. I can't tell you how many times they'd start an excuse with, "you don't understand, I'm deaf and..." I'd cock an eyebrow at them and they'd be like, "Oh. Right." (The deaf/hh programs in the L.A. School system are almost entirely staffed by hearing people.)

Self-discipline might come into play in a very positive sense when one is searching for what direction in life seems most fulfilling. And again, when one has tentatively found that direction, the determination to stay with it for long enough to see whether you can, indeed, disappear into it and feel bliss. This energetic focusing on something promising seems to bring pleasure--or, if not out-of-oneself pleasure, at least the joy of learning something new--in a large variety of endeavors. Over the years I have found that, reliably, I can lose myself in teaching, writing, contemplation of art, heavy exercise, hiking, and good conversation of any kind. I have always wished that I could lose myself in reading, but a mild dyslexia makes me too conscious--and, therefore, analytical--a reader to genuinely enter the other world a fascinating book offers. There are a lot of heavy readers in NE Maine; many of our friends disappear for days into their books when the NE storms make the outdoors a struggle. Others disappear, with enthusiasm, into that very struggle!

When I was about 20, I was out for a summer afternoon drive with my father. He noted that I was probably thinking about graduate school or work. I was--and increasingly as graduation drew nearer--but I was bent on finding a "good" endeavor, rather than one that was "right" for me. I expressed this frustration withg finding a "good" path to my father, and he replied, "Do something that you really like; don't try to please anyone else; it has to be for you. Do anything you want. (pause). But, I'd stay away from law." When he said this, I felt a great relief and almost instantly realized that I really wanted to stay in an academic environment, because this is where I had consistently found the greatest pleasure. Thank you, Dad, wherever you are!

Miklos7 - what do you do now?

Husker, Since my retirement the classroom, I spend more time writing (currently, I am translating some Paul Eluard poems about artists he knew), more time hiking with my wife, more time talking with friends over lunch and dinner, more time visiting museums and places with interesting architecture, more time listening to music. I still have three students in creative writing. Also, I remain on the boards of a chamber music school, a local chamber music organization (for whom I write program notes for the schedule of concerts)--and I have joined the board of an area organization that offers colloquies for up to 15 participants in a variety of areas, but mostly in arts, history, lit, and hard sciences. Next month, I lead a discussion called FOUR FILMS ABOUT ARTISTS ("Frida," "Pollock," "Basquiat," and "Crumb"!
My body requires a great deal of heavy exercise, without which I cannot get my mind to shut up when I want to sleep--so, add the treadmill, tennis, and workout time, and I am a fairly busy guy. It's always been this way, and, most days, I enjoy it, as, if I keep in motion, I am generally relaxed and learning new things. I still miss the teaching, but I love the luxury of a less-structured, though still active, schedule.

Miklos - I'm impressed!! - very nice.

Sozobe, Do you have a feeling that, unless they have already become disaffected for whatever reason, most students like challenge, high expectations, and putting forth effort--even in areas that do not fascinate them. My hunch is that there is a latent work ethic in most all of us; it needs to be awakened by someone like you who knows how to reward as well as demand, to elicit pride of accomplishment and feelings of self-worth. Too many schools, at all levels, recently seem to provide students with a constant stream of praise, no matter what the students' degree of involvement and responsibility. This is preparation neither for real life nor self-respect.

Are students in vocational school better-focused than most, as they are, most of their time, studying skills for a particular endeavor? Or is this an illusion I carry?!

Oh, definitely. I talked about the "flow" theory (can never remember how to spell Mihaly's last name) here recently, I think that's part of it -- the match between the challenge at hand and one's skills. Too easy and it's boring. Too hard and it's frustrating. Challenging but doable, and with feedback -- invigorating.

Here's where I talked about it recently:

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=1123309#1123309

My students were a mixed lot. Some of them were there because they really wanted a job and really wanted to get off of SSI. A lot of them were there because they were forced to (or faced loss of benefits) from the Department of Rehabilitation. Within those two groups the willingness to work varied as well, but obviously the second group was more challenging. (Probably much LESS focused than most.) Every single one of them benefited from personalized attention and high expectations, though. (Every single one of 'em got a job and nobody was fired.)

Every one found a job and held it. Bravo!

One-on-one attention seems to be the key ingredient to inspiring success. It bothers me greatly that most of our country's schools (and classrooms) are becoming larger and larger, making life ever less personal for the students. One can receive good personalized attention in a huge school, but in these mega-institutions there is often a lack of community and a feeling of being just-a-number, both of which tend to diminish the positive effects of individual attention. In bricks-and-mortar and in ordering spaghetti, there may be an efficiency of scale, but not in educating human beings.

Too bad that economies and efficiency of scale is--at least tacitly--at the center of American educational policy. As populations grow very large the over-organization of institutions becomes necessary. It is the rationale for the bureaucratization (or "rationalization") of life. But in education that is grotesque. Student-teacher ratio is critical at all levels of education. At the college and university levels I would like to see a separation of the physical, math-engineering sciences and the arts and human sciences (I prefer scholarship to science here). Universities are becoming more and more like industrial corporations (they've been like governmental beauracracies for generations). Although it may be no more than humanistic romanticism on my part, I cherish the image in my mind of small liberal arts colleges and universites where everyone knows everyone else, including their intellectual biases and enthusiasms. In such centers of learning (as opposed to centers of invention and patent generation), students AND FACULTY mature, self-discover and assist others in doing the same. This can only happen when the centers are not caught up in the culture of institutional growth at the expense of personal growth.

Odd, miklos, I was trying to find Jackson Pollock, and the answer came back hauntingly that he could not be forged. All attempts to imitate him were akin to spaghetti.

http://www.ibiblio.org/wm/paint/auth/pollock/

More thumbing one's nose at the followers of Beckett who continues to inhale.

JLN, Former students of mine who went on to St. John's (in either Annapolis or Santa Fe) were always highly enthusiastic about the experience. Small, friendly, intense, discussion-oriented--and, for all of them, a lot of learning and a lot of fun. Do you know how very small campuses like these stay afloat financially. The Maryland branch is very old (1696?), but I don't recall its having a large endowment. Perhaps, the alumni and alumnae, though few in number, have been unusually generous over the years. Are there any newer colleges that have the small scale and large passion of St. John's? If so, I fear they are an endangered species of academia.

Letty, Thanks for the Pollock site! It has some excellent images of important paintings. I agree with you entirely that Pollock--even pre-1940s Pollock--is likely unforgeable. My wife is currently studying Borges for a discussion group in short story, and I printed out for her a long interview with Julio Cortazar, in which he noted that imitations of Borges were impossible. Possibly, all artists who have a powerful and suggestive singularity are inimitable. Picasso? Matisse? Van Gogh? Kafka? Strangely, when I looked at "Stenographic Figure" (1942) by Pollock at the site you posted, I found myself thinking that, if one were to attempt to imitate Picasso, this would be a fair shot! Of course, Pollock was not interested in any such project; he was interested in what came from himself. Best early anecdote of this belligerent self-focus I've found comes from the period he was doing road-work with his father. During the hot days when they drank quarts of water, Pollock and his dad would have contests to see who could "draw" better pictures by urinating. Pollock the son thought he was by far the better artist.

Miklos,a central feature of a survival plan for small humanistic colleges is freedom from the "grow or die" assumption. They should think small regarding quantity (number and size of buildings and size of student body) and grand in terms of quality of education. Faculty should be permitted (even encouraged) to do research, BUT they should be required to teach well. Costs could be kept down if development goals are not permitted to dominate. The past presidents of my university have been evaluated primarily on the number and size of facilities for which they have found public and private financing. They all gave lip service to teaching, but this "dedication to teaching" was rarely if ever expressed in action and concrete policy; indeed, I know two young faculty who were awarded "best teacher of the year" and denied tenure the following year. This was in part because they had not published ENOUGH (quantity) and, more important, they had not attracted enough money to the institution by way of grants. The grow or die syndrome is, of course, a replication of the culture of competitive corporate America. Truly excellent colleges would not need to compete in terms of size if they develop reputations for educational excellence. "Excellence," by the way, is a buzzword in corporate-universityland, but it refers mainly to size and rate of expansion. In both worlds (education and business) the central concern seems to be market share.

-edited

You're velcome, Miklos, and I smiled at the interp of your moniker and avatar. What a handsome dog, but tell me. Do you LIKE Pollock, or is he simply "art for art's sake"?

JL, it used to be publish or perish, now it's expert or expire.

Miklos, my deepest apologies. I think I got you confused with theantibuddhist. It's gonna be one of those days.

JL, Very well put! There is some truth to the notion that "if it's a business, then grow it." However, as you point out so clearly, a school, esp. a "humanistic college," is only PARTIALLY a business. Alas, the administrators of schools persist in viewing them (except for occasional lip-service to intellectual ideals) as 100% business, and, therefore, the sources of money direct the mission of the institution. In my state, the heavy-money supporters of the university are interested in sports and the paper industry. Consequently, the main campus has extraordinary facilities for ice hockey and baseball (which attract the level of coaches and players the donors want to see) and first-rate academic programs in the sciences that connect with turning the forests into product. If a student wants to major in Art or French or Music, however, he or she is working in an area that must beg for every nickel.

Thank you, Letty. Yes, I do generally like Pollock, because, when he was not incapacitated by booze, he thought hard and worked hard. I believe his evolution as an artist is genuine--and that he produced SOME great works. As you pointed out earlier, no one will try to follow him directly--and his art loses an extraordinary amount of impact when seen in reproduction--but he is important, not just historically, but as a prime example of artistic energy and persistence.