1. Beyond merely summarizing the object(s) being portrayed, the most common (and in many ways, the easiest) ways to analyze a painting are

To talk about its affects on ME

To talk about the life and psychology of the artist

This course would not be doing its job if it did not give students the opportunity to analyze a painting in terms of composition. So (This is optional, but some will enjoy and benefit from it, I'm sure) -

Composition is about the actual techniques used and choices made by the artist in representing his/her subject: colors, lines, brush strokes, the way the subjects are situated in relation to each other, etc.

How might paintings of the same subject be different in composition/technique? Why might the differences matter in ways that impact our lives?

Here's a famous Rubens painting, The Garden of Love:

http://www.peterpaulrubens.org/The-Garden-Of-Love.jpg

Here is one possible comparison (same theme, similar title, but very different composition):

http://www.1st-art-gallery.com/thumbnail/187283/1/The-Garden-Of-Love,-C.1465-70.jpg

And how does this one compare?:

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5067/5680795834_31cd66039c_z.jpg Possible approaches:

Do you prefer one of these over another? And if so, what role does cultural conditioning play in your preference?

Do see how distinct issues of composition can be from the matter of subject?

Do you see how composition affects meaning?

2. In this discussion, several of you have commented on the different kinds of thinking and learning that we see emerging during this era: rationalism, deduction vs. induction, science vs. religion, etc. Given the fact that we have noticed seemingly different ways of thinking about things, the question is worth asking...

What kind of learning or experience matters most? Here's how I'd like to invite further discussion (for anyone who might be interested):

If a person wants to really understand what human life is about, and what is most important, on what kind of knowledge should that person most concentrate, and why?

-Knowledge most people associate with careers and jobs

-Knowledge most people associate with religion and spirituality

Knowledge most people associate with science and technology

Knowledge most people associate with politics and economics

-Knowledge most people associate with psychology, family and human relationships

-Knowledge most people associate with the arts (including literature, theater, film and the media)

-Some other category of knowledge (please specify)

To what degree are these categories truly separate from each other?

Do you feel the above divisions are legitimate, or would you modify them?

And one more possible question: What is the real meaning of the word faith? Is objective knowledge sufficient as the basis for being functional adults? Is "faith" only religious, or are there other kinds of faith (scientific, political, relational, etc.)?