I’ve been thinking or perhaps I should say pondering. I do so once in a while as I wander the hill.
I have noticed that persons seem to have a primary method of expressing themselves and/or of reacting to beauty and stuff and many people have at least one secondary method. But how people respond to an event/sight/sound/feeling varies so much.
For example, Cindy and Kent seem to respond to visual things with words that are at least sometimes expressed as poetry and usually expressed poetically.
My brother Earl, although he can appreciate a beautiful sight, rarely breaks into words. But he responds with words, often poetry, when he hears music or is thinking about an event.
I see pictures. When I read, even if the words are a description of an “abstract” concept or when I see something and want to capture the “feeling” inspired by the lighting or the beauty of a “line” by drawing or painting. But I don't see pictures in response to music.
I think that Cindy and Kent also both have at least one secondary response and that is visual through their ability to see in a way to take awesome photos.
Earl’s secondary(ies) – he responds by playing his own compositions on the piano in response to feelings, ideas and has been known to “doodle” by making an abstract drawing.
Me, my secondary might be words in that I respond with words sometimes but am more apt to “tell a story” in response to, well, just about anything rather than write anything faintly resembling poetry
1 comment:
You “hit the nail on the head” in my case… I’m even not above using a cliché. Productive or not, I seem to seldom be “at a loss for words”.
Your ponder has caused me to re-visit the theories of Harvard psychologist, Howard Gardner, whose ideas made an impression on me years ago when I was into the study of early childhood education. You might already be familiar: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_multiple_intelligences.
My daughter, the 5th grade teacher, has applied his rationale liberally in her career, although the current structure of public education doesn’t accommodate that easily. This has motivated her to make a shift to remedial math instruction.
Gardner aims at the “understanding” of - while your idea focuses on reaction and expression of – which seems to me a fun place to go!
My first impulse upon reading your article was to explore the notion that the human psyche must needs react and express. Indeed the avoidance or repression of doing so is quite “unhealthy”. Of course, a “healthy” form of doing so is the companion notion. In the interest of brevity (or is it too late) I offer one case in my experience:
PDKNOW, in his journey of self-discovery unearthed a gift for musical expression, learning to master the keyboard after his boyhood resistance of formal instruction. It would not have transpired this way, I suggest, if it had not coincided with a need to express the joys and sorrows of his youth. This was precipitated by his Marine Corps deployment to Kuwait. Today the outcome of his indulgence of a natural form/method of reaction/expression has produced at least a dozen original ballads (some of which are copyrighted) and an additional skill with the guitar. Those of us close to him, erroneously, encourage him to seek professional status. We miss the point… as your ponder explains.
Post a Comment