National Art Education Association

Literacy Media and MeaningAuthor(s): Mary Ann StankiewiczSource: Art Education, Vol. 50, No. 4, Literacy, Media, and Meaning (Jul., 1997), pp. 4-5Published by: National Art Education AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3193646 .

Accessed: 15/06/2014 06:26

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

National Art Education Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to ArtEducation.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.181 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 06:26:57 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

-Aem al

L E ITERACY, broadly defined, is the ability to write and read. When the visual arts are metaphorically treated

as a language, the concept of literacy is extended to art and we talk about visual literacy, aesthetic literacy, media or cultural literacy. Just as methods of teaching students to make and respond to visual art have

changed over time, so have methods of teaching verbal literacy. Children in earlyAmerican schools were

taught the alphabet, two-lettersyllables, then combinations ofsyllables that made words. The New England Primer was

chiefly a spelling book because colonial educators assumed that knowing how to write and spell were the most important

components of literacy (Tchudi, 1991). A new kind of literacy arose between 1790 and 1853, a "technical literacy" that required mastery offour lan-

guages or systems of notation (Stevens, 1995, p. 2). Workersfrom earliergenerations had to invent machine parts by trial and error, orphysically disassemble and reassemble a machine to understand how it worked. Antebellum young men

ART EDUCATION / JULY 1997

?,_P_'J11? . i z

i ? -?? Y -? I :? ;c L?

:I . ,i?i ,

1 r .I-?? iC

r 19'2? C ?- rll *? : j i

I ` '? i tjr,l r_?

?. ; I?C.:e I: " r r c. II

? ; Z -?

? - ..r?? .ar? ?

r

r

rC4 i^= I? r (I i? ..

c , '?

r i ?II \ ?? ?. tt. I

r I- ? 7

I? ?? I ?' ?-? .? i i -t

r

r '? : r I r:

?.. i r ??I :i

r r .?

- ? ?? :;-:?"

? ? r;e: r

r

? ,? ??. ? ?

r ?? ? ?.;

?, d ? c r * ? r F

"' : ?

- ?.J ?1,;..

rI

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.181 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 06:26:57 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

and women learned the vocabulary andgrammar ofalphabetic expression (traditional verbal literacy, as well as scientif- ic notation, mathematical notation, and spatial-graphic representation in order to communicate information about the new world of industrial machines. Drawinggave them a means to represent and communicate technical understand-

ings, contributing to the spread of technology and the invention of new and improved machines.

During the late 19th century, teachers ofEnglish adopted the belief "that knowledge of the rules ofgrammar led to improved performance in language" (Tchudi, 1991, p. 5). In the visual arts, a parallel trend can befound. Students were taught elements of art and principles of design, how to describe and analyze their relationships in works of art, and how to organize the elements according to the principles to produce "good" designs. In the visual arts, the "alphabet" has been defined as dot, line, shape, direction, value, hue and saturation of color, texture, scale, dimension and motion (What is visual literacy?, 1994). As Kerry Freedman and Sydney Walkerpoint out in their respective articles, many works of contemporary art are not amenable to formal analysis. More often artists at the end of the 20th century seem to

challenge viewers to interpret meaningsfrom their work.

Almost two decades ago, Vincent Lanier advocated aesthetic literacy, an approach to art education in which students would examine "questions and problems of aesthetic theory" applied to a range of visual arts "bothfine and ver- nacular" (1981, p. 162). He even suggested that "a dialogue curriculum in art would be something like a class in

English andAmerican literature" (Lanier, 1981, p. 163). Unlike earlier approaches to literacy in art that taught "spelling" and "grammar" through studio instruction in elements and principles of art, Lanier's proposalsfor aesthetic

literacyfocused attention on response to works of art. Like many advocates of visual literacy, Lanier wanted to avoid the elitism associated with exclusive use of a canon of literary (or artistic) classics by studying television commercials and

programs, movies, and other newer media through the dialogue curriculum. Lanier's aesthetic literacy anticipated cur- rent interest in meaning and interpretation. Just as literacy in language arts has expanded beyond spelling and gram- mar, so literacyfor visual arts is more than exercises in composition orpure design, more than analysis ofsignificant form, or even "reading" a work offine art.

The articles in this issue ofArt Education bring together themes related to literacy, newer media, and meaning. They raise important questionsfor art teachers: What does literacy in the visual arts mean? How might contemporary mass media be incorporated into the art curriculum? How do newer technologies affect traditional approaches to art ele-

ments, such as color theory? How do we teach artmakingfor meaning in the context of contemporary art when students lack familiarground rules?And, how should we handle situations where students use "bad language" in their art?

This issue is unusual because it contains two articles by the same author. When Kerry Freedman originally sub- mitted her manuscript, our reviewers recommended publication but suggested that one long manuscript should really be two shorter articles. Kerry revised the manuscript with attention to the reviewers' recommendations. Shortly after I received the revised manuscript, I received a second submission from Kerry which she explained was the other piece adaptedfrom the original submission. She also explained that she saw the two manuscripts as companion articles. After receiving anotherset ofreviews, then contemplating my tentative selection of articlesfor this issue, I realized that she was

right. Thus, both pieces are being published together, like bookendsfor the themes of this issue.

MaryAnn Stankiewicz, Editor

REFERENCES Lanier, V. (1981). Six items on the agenda for the eighties. In G. W. Hardiman & T. Zernich (Eds.), Foundationsfor curriculum development

and evaluation in art education (pp. 155-170). Champaign, IL: Stipes. Stevens, E.W., Jr. (1995). The grammar of the machine. New Haven: Yale University Press. Tchudi, S. (1991). Planning and assessing the curriculum in English language arts. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and

Curriculum Development. What is visual literacy? (1994, May 6). The on-line visual literacy project (On-line). Available:

http://www.pomona.edu/visual.lit/intro/intro.html

JULY 1997 / ART EDUCATION

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.181 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 06:26:57 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions