The front page asked to draw themselves as either an artist or a designer, and the flip side questioned why they had chosen to depict themselves in such a way.
Back
The survey began;
And the results were as follows,
The artist had to say that he/she embraces vulnerability and shuns security; that he/she creates whatever is in the mind, an 'illogical extension' of the person, with an utmost sense of freedom.
The designer says he/she is an universal problem solver. In his/her work, she applies and questions the principles of art and it's history to produce a valid and rational product for the better of the community.
They say they belong to both the worlds. They are 'role-players'. They morph into what is in need of.
They say they are both, then say they are neither, then are content with the juxtaposition in their answers. Is it better to understand one's self in this manner; would you answer that for me please?
Am confused as to which pictures belong to designers and which to artists.
ReplyDeleteWhen I look at some of the images, nothing is ticked.
Also, I would like to know how the image drawn is actually a representation of them as an artist. It looks like a Rosharch test in many ways; so is there some way you can decode the image to show that the person who drew it is on the artist or designer side?
Or does one just take it at face value though it is just a subjective image with just an association with the words artist/designer?
Unless you have some sort of reference list that tells you that artists represent themselves in "artist mode" (define its qualities) and designers in "designer mode" (define the quality of such images) - this remains just a foundation spontaneity exercise.
Avy, if you look at the cards closely, they have been ticked.
ReplyDeleteAnd I had only mentioned for them to draw/represent themselves as either an artist or a designer. They have portrayed themselves in a way they thought was understood by the term.
Yes, all in all, it still is a foundation spontaneity exercise.