Art can or cannot be a waste of time. There is has been a lot of discussion and work in my English class being put into a question that has no definite answer. There are so many things to consider with the creation and sharing of art. Was it made for you or an audience? Why was this art made? What resources did it take? Is the art even considered “good”? These questions and more I believe determine if it is a waste of time or not. Of course, this will be expanded on in detail at a later point.
Using methods of organizing thoughts could prove useful for starting the paper on the subject. I personally set it up in two columns, one for EA and one for Zander. On each side I put the main ideas I want to touch on in the paper that came from the texts or ideas I had reading the texts. On the bottom, while still separated into the columns I have personal experiences that I want to include in support of the topics of the papers. While I personally didn’t see anything new that I hadn’t already seen or thought of, new connections may fall into line because of it. What it can help with is finding the next paragraph to start or next idea to touch on to make the flow of the paper, well, flow better. As for finding my center in the paper, certainly. This may have already been the case, but when it is down on the paper it gives a better mental picture of where I want to take it. Overall I can see its uses and will attempt to see if it helps outside of the English classroom.
You are doing an amazing job engaging this question with “no definite answer.” I applaud your evolving results: art can or cannot be a waste of time.
Just today, I spent some time reading about the KKK’s use of “art”–film, music, etc. as a powerful tool to attract new members. This all got me thinking about how I define art and what that implies. Keep up those thoughtful responses, and I look forward to reading your thoughts!