this Rand quote is pretty weird.
oh, this is my first post here- hi! im an arch. student from berlin.
as i am a design *student*- that is, still involved in actually learning
my "skills"- i don't agree with the assumption "talent = intuition".
now what distinguishes someone talented (in the Rand sense) from someone
untalented? the final product? the results of the intuitive process?
and more importantly, how can you determine that someone's talented
before he even started his studies? a lot of the times, people test
drawing skills and (insert univ. application test procedure here).
in the Rand sense, all should be clear by then: some folks perform well,
(obviously very intuitive people!), and others don't- and get thrown
out. it's kind of a "either you have it or you don't" scenario, highly
dubious and pretty suprematist- yes i feel a bit offended.
it's my personal view that talent/intuition can be taught by
sensitivizing (sp??) students by the means of a self-reflective trial
and error regime.
in any case, design is more than the intuitive feel for (let's be
heretical here as Rand is a graph. designer) proportion, layout and
color. it is the constant fight for realizing what one is actually
doing, and thereby learning to distinguish the "intuitive" from the
"what i've decided to do for a reason". a lot of the times, oh-so
intuitively made decisions or brushstrokes reveal their true intent at a
later point- teaching design should emancipate students in the sense of
empowering them to realize what they're doing the very moment they're
actually doing it.
regards,
max christian
(who is glad that univ. education is virtually for free in germany.
that way, it doesnt matter whether i'm talented or not, huh? :)
|