Zoom In- The Nature of a Palm Tree
I took this picture of the palm trees at Germaine's Luau. Palm trees are a very Hawaiian thing and can be found in many paintings and photographs of the island.
Palm trees are very prevalent, so I wanted to display that using this picture. It is rare to see a single palm tree growing naturally.
Palm trees sometimes remind me of "Survivor". The castaways use the palm fronds as shelter and the coconuts as sustenance. Palm tree can serve a dual purpose when out in the wild. I chose to do this as an oil painting in honor of the painting we own that feature palm trees.
I love this photo. I brightened up the hues of the original photo and saturated it. Palm trees are so vibrant!
My husband is very interested in the photography assignments for this class. He wanted to create his own abstraction from my original photograph.
What's the big idea?
“Don’t just look- think!... See with your mind, not your eyes!” (Root-Bernstein and Root-Bernstein, 73). I enjoy thinking about things in different ways, but I often struggle with seeing the larger pictures in something that is not blatantly obvious. However, I suppose that makes having “light bulb moments” (like in cartoons when a light bulb appears over a character’s head) even more exciting.
I wonder if this is because “abstractions are so common in our society that we rarely pay attention to them” (Root-Bernstein and Root-Bernstein, 70). I do not think this is it. I think I just never learned how to look beyond the obvious. I try to encourage my students to not see things for what they are, but for what they could be. This is the essence of invention and could be why inventors are such successful thinkers.
Often I find the visual aspect of abstracting in writing to be more appealing than abstraction in visual arts. The poem by e.e. cummings on page 72 was particularly interesting. Sometimes I think it is not enough to use words and expect the reader to visualize what we are trying to say. Sometimes it helps to give the reader assistance by forming a picture or concept with our written words.
Root-Bernstein and Root-Bernstein write, “…analogy refers to a functional resemblance between things that are otherwise unlike” (137). I can see how this concept relates to abstracting. When we abstract something, we break it down into the most basic form. Sometimes that basic form looks quite different from the original, but the basic resemblance is still apparent.
I have previously mentioned that I try to teach my students to not only see things for what they are, but for what they might be. Root-Bernstein and Root-Bernstein also emphasize this concept, “Only when we can see things for what they might be and not just for what they are can we begin to use them in novel ways” (156). This statement brings my idea of abstracting and the idea the authors have of analogizing together. It also makes me wonder if I am possibly confusing the two. I see the definite similarities between abstracting and analogizing, but I find it hard to see the differences.
In my head, I think of abstracting as more visual, something done in painting or in poetry, something that can be seen. Analogizing seems more logical and verbal as if explaining a concept in science or mathematics, something that is heard or explained. I understand that both thinking tools have cross over, but that is the easiest way for me to distinguish them when I am thinking. I am not sure how factual my distinctions are, but it is the only way I can make sense of what I read.
Of all the thinking tools we have read about so far, I believe abstracting and analogizing to be the most difficult for me. I know it is never too early or late to learn these skills. I need more practice in order to engage my students in better and deeper abstraction and analogizing.
I wonder if this is because “abstractions are so common in our society that we rarely pay attention to them” (Root-Bernstein and Root-Bernstein, 70). I do not think this is it. I think I just never learned how to look beyond the obvious. I try to encourage my students to not see things for what they are, but for what they could be. This is the essence of invention and could be why inventors are such successful thinkers.
Often I find the visual aspect of abstracting in writing to be more appealing than abstraction in visual arts. The poem by e.e. cummings on page 72 was particularly interesting. Sometimes I think it is not enough to use words and expect the reader to visualize what we are trying to say. Sometimes it helps to give the reader assistance by forming a picture or concept with our written words.
Root-Bernstein and Root-Bernstein write, “…analogy refers to a functional resemblance between things that are otherwise unlike” (137). I can see how this concept relates to abstracting. When we abstract something, we break it down into the most basic form. Sometimes that basic form looks quite different from the original, but the basic resemblance is still apparent.
I have previously mentioned that I try to teach my students to not only see things for what they are, but for what they might be. Root-Bernstein and Root-Bernstein also emphasize this concept, “Only when we can see things for what they might be and not just for what they are can we begin to use them in novel ways” (156). This statement brings my idea of abstracting and the idea the authors have of analogizing together. It also makes me wonder if I am possibly confusing the two. I see the definite similarities between abstracting and analogizing, but I find it hard to see the differences.
In my head, I think of abstracting as more visual, something done in painting or in poetry, something that can be seen. Analogizing seems more logical and verbal as if explaining a concept in science or mathematics, something that is heard or explained. I understand that both thinking tools have cross over, but that is the easiest way for me to distinguish them when I am thinking. I am not sure how factual my distinctions are, but it is the only way I can make sense of what I read.
Of all the thinking tools we have read about so far, I believe abstracting and analogizing to be the most difficult for me. I know it is never too early or late to learn these skills. I need more practice in order to engage my students in better and deeper abstraction and analogizing.
How do I love thee? Let me count the ways...
I started out thinking about the broader parts of speech. As I thought some more, I thought about how nouns are really the most basic part of speech. Even more basic than that are things. Things are so basic that ever Dr. Seuss used “thing” as character names in The Cat in the Hat. Things are omnipresent, they are everywhere. There is a quote that goes something like, the most important things in life aren’t thing. While I see truth in that, things are vital to survival. We need the basics: food, water, and shelter. Things give life.
Life Source
Sitting in a room, surrounded
Useless stuff
My stomach rumbles and I smile
Open the refrigerator
Sitting in a room, overwhelmed
Pointless stuff
Dryness in my throat and I smile
Water straight from the tap
Sitting in a room, chaotic
All this stuff
It’s raining outside and I smile
A roof over my head
Life Source
Sitting in a room, surrounded
Useless stuff
My stomach rumbles and I smile
Open the refrigerator
Sitting in a room, overwhelmed
Pointless stuff
Dryness in my throat and I smile
Water straight from the tap
Sitting in a room, chaotic
All this stuff
It’s raining outside and I smile
A roof over my head