Where do we draw the line for realism?

damn trees are in my eyes!

As long as the actual diorama is "G" rated I see no problem, it's not the subject matter but the execution of the diorama that seems to be in question. We shouldn't turn a blind eye to a subject that is documented in history just because it may be objectionable to some viewers. If we do we begin a trek down an long road to losing some of our heritage. A concern that is prevalent in this day. It's like a matter that came up at a model contest once. IPMS had ruled objectionable material, i.e Nudes, excessive gore and such could be put in a separate area for viewing where children and/or people who would find such things objectionable wouldn't have to view them. If an area to be set aside wasn't available, the entry could be excluded from the show. Now, in this instance a contestant brought in a diorama of the Holocaust, depicting Jewish families being loaded onto a train (presumably to somewhere like Auschiwtz). It was a well done diorama, no violence was depicted, and it's a historical event. Now according to the story, the Judges were of the opinion that some people would find it offensive and since they didn't have a sectioned off area for such models, the diorama was excluded from the show.

That's just plain stupid. No violence, no gore, no sex. Just what was in the judges heads? Did it just make them uncomfertable? So what.

I would hope that no darker reasons held sway.

Tom

Drew:

You seem to want to teach your kids history, creativity and communication. Let the kid do his stuff and you might be able to add integrity, honesty and frankness to the list. If you tell the kid "no" on this one, then he might get the impression that its OK to hide those bits of history we find unpallateable, upsetting or politically incorrect. Today it might be Malmede, tomorrow the rape of Nanking, next week Pinochet.

If youre a good teacher (and I think you are otherwise you wouldnt even be thinking of this) its what you make of the displays that matters to the other kids and anyone else who sees it - if you work it right, help the kid when its finished to present his report to people in an effective way then maybe you've helped one kid learn how to exercise freedom of speech properly.

Andrew

Certified

I think that if his teachers and administrators do their jobs and stand by his work (assuming the historical accuracy etc.), all will be well. It might help if he has prominately displayed text explaining the diorama (rather than small, or detached text).

That would be the place that had two seriously sick individuals, who were (nominally) under police observation, commit a massive crime unrelated to anything but their own internal problems right?

This might be a sign of rampant cynicism kicking in, but I think being skilled at PC hypocracy is a better path to social acceptance than honesty. The truth is not a popular commodity. None of this changes the fact that personally I prefer the truth and honesty bit, but it does get me into trouble occasionally.

Rob

the diorama was excluded from the show.

PC,lawyers and stupidity run rampant my friend. Get used to it it's just going to get worse.

"Drew Hill" schreef in bericht news:40213e56$1@Anduin...

Certified

I'm not a teacher nor do I have kids myself. But I wouldn't have him do it for a few reasons. First I think there is more to raising kids than simply showing or depicting reality without proper mental assistance to help them put things into the right perspective. I think encouraging and rewarding projects like this may yield the risk that some kids get the wrong ideas about war or get positive associations with war. Also, there is enough war going on already at the moment to make the kids aware of its existense so there is no need to put more emphasize to it. War is not a normal part of life and should therefore not be treated as such. If I were a teacher I would start a project that involves discussion or solving conflicts in a peaceful way instead. And if the student likes to model, why not have him model a historical interesting structure or construction? I'm convinced he will harvest much more admiration from fellow students for that than for depicting a massacre. This has nothing to do with PC-ness or politics but merely trying to think educational.

My two cents.

If anyone visiting London would care to see one of the most hard-hitting dioramas ever made, I would strongly recommend visiting the Imperial War Museum in Lambeth. Go and look at the Auschwitz/Birkenau diorama.

It is a huge tableau, depicting just the southern edge of the camp. It's set in a dimly-lit hall and is painted pure white. My initial impression was that a great deal of work had gone into representing small plantations of fir trees scattered across the site. I then realised that they were not snow-covered trees, but the victims... forests of them.

I spent many long minutes looking into the detail in the model. The cattle wagons, the guards and their dogs, women and children being separated from the men, the lines heading down into the underground bunkers, others marching off into the slave labour camp... The stark whiteness only served to heighten the chilling effect the diorama had on me.

I've been to Auschwitz/Birkenau and I've walked the ground, as I did at Majdanek, Belsen and Treblinka. There is something tangible about the atmosphere, aura - call it what you will - at those terrible places and I felt it again in that dim room, looking at the handiwork of a skilled model maker, who used white paint - stark white, the symbol of cleanliness and purity - to get the message across.

Let your young pupil build his diorama, but please point out to him the reality of what happened at Malmedy. It was a real event, not "Hollywood". It not only ended the short lives of those massacred, but changed the lives of all their families, friends and surviving comrades for ever.

Just my two penn'orth from England...

Chris Hughes

Emphasis to him one of the stated requirements is it has to be G rated. If it doesn't comply, it gets an F.

Tom

If it gets them interested in the subject of history it is a good thing. If you were never given teh opportunity to read interesting books, you may still be struggling. Addititonaly, this is cross-over instruction- allowing multiple forms of learning in a lesson.

"Yep, that's right, no need to integrate art with other disciplines in our school. Nosiree, just the three Rs please." I hear this rant all the time around here--from the reactionary buffoons who pass themselves off as Republicans.

Vess, whyever are you on rms if you don't understand the connection between models and learning?

As far as the subject matter in question, yes, the G rating needs to be enforced, but I think that was inherent in all the projects. The real issue for me is whether the explicit violence of the diorama (Not blood/gore, but the firearms in association with bodies) is put in the appropriate context. A diorama without a written placard describing the context would simply present to the other kids a scene that might seem to celebrate violence. The context needs to be explicit--the inherent evil of the situation should be neither vague nor ambiguous.

Mark Schynert

I have an online friend who was in the next classroom over that day. It doesn't seem to have hurt her, at least not now that she's had time to work through it (and it didn't take her very long to work through it, either). Youngsters are remarkably resilient nowadays.

Assuming that this is the high end of middle school (grade 8 or 9), I'd say let the modeller do whatever diorama he wants, as long as it meets the guidelines - especially the "G-rated" guideline. Drew might want to discuss with the student the general idea of the diorama before the student starts work on it, though, just to make sure they both agree on what makes for a G rating.

I don't really see thai as a debate on realism. As you state, they are judged on creativity rather than skill. Furthermore, the criteria stae that it must be G-Rated (although for this subject, this contardicts the realism requirement).

But batlle dioramas can - and have been done - for MANY years at the middle school level and still be acceptable.

Have the student submit his plan - as long as the plan meets the stated criteria, it shouldn't be a problem.

There is one issue that I do have a problem with - not with your dilemma - but with realism in WWII vintage model aircraft. That is the LACK of Nazi (e.g, Swastika) decals supplied with kits. I understand the reasons, up to and including the legal issues of countries where these models are manufactured. But I still lament this as being excessively restrictive, especially with regard to realism.

I understand your conundrum. One problem is that the diorama must be of a 20th century subject. Unfortunately - in many cases - not enough time may have passed to desensitize the emotional aspect of the subject.

Again, if the diorama meets the stated criteria, it shouldn't be an issue. But also be aware that several of your criteria and judging standards are somewhat in conflict, and may need to be tempered appropritely.

Danny

I see no conflict. He said creativity over skill. Realism wasn't in the criteria. A bloody battlefield tells me nothing, hence would not reflect much creativity in my book. Its up to the student to pick a subject that lends its self to the assignment and requirements. If he doesn't think he can skillfully pull it off with a G rating he needs to finds something else.

Better than mere dead bodies and bloody battlefield would be depiction of stages of the battle rather than the aftermath-

Troops taking a hill, sneaking up on an objective, a team coordinating an attack to knock out a machine gun nest, digging in for an attack, assembling for an attack, the moment before an attack, the moment of an attack, waiting, watching, diverting attention, taking compass and map coorinates and calling them in for air support, squad movements through terrain or over obsticle, raising a flag in victory, unique terrain, landmarks, or structures of the battle area... All of these would be a lot more interesting than dead soldiers and still be G rated.

Tom

Easy there fella, your overspray is hitting some of us artsy-fartsy Republicans in the face.

WmB

To reply, get the HECK out of there snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net

Here are a few thoughts, FWTW: Is it clear to you and to the students what constitutes a "G" rating? As part of the process of the project's being cleared, is the student asked to describe his/her concept of the event and what will be the narrative center of the diorama? At the IPMS level we judge a diorama partly on the basis of its narrative content. Can the student convince you that his/her diorama will tell a story that's more than simply gratuitous bloodshed?

The fact that the particular historical event is so widely unknown (certainly to me, for one) speaks in favor of its suitability for this project -- at least more people will know about it.

I hate political correctitude, although it seems clear that it's going to be with us for the foreseeable future.

Pip Moss

I used to feel cheap 'cause I had no signature.