Captivating Art

I shall add to our dicussion on Monday, as we talked about whether the art, being music or pictures, enhances the words being spoken by the conveyer. I personnally, having sometimes what I think to be a form of A.D.D as I usually have a very short attention span, gained the ability to listen to the words in the in the texts because I was intrigued by the form of art. It worked especially well for me during the second. Even though I found that her bias was showing through, and she would swing evidence by not telling the whole story throughout her presentation, I found it easier to pay attention with the animation. Yet, I wanted to see if this is how other people would view this response. So i did a little bit of research. From the website of "Learning Your Way" it says that there are three ways of learning. There is 30 % accounted to the people who learn from touch, and 65 % of people who benifit from a visual demonstration. That means only 5% of people are prone to benifitting from souly oral presentations. Suggestions for helping these visual readers would be accompanying photos, charts, or power points with audible conversations. Now this accounts for the second presentation. The first however, for me has a different story. There would be a fine line that this dually audible perrformance could possibly cross. It was not the fact that the art was accompanying the text that I was able to focus and listen to it, but just that fact that it intrigued me to find out what this man was up to. There is the fine line of too much musical distraction where I would become oblivious to the text for some parts of it. Therefore, for me, the visual art of the second presentation enhanced the presentation, where as the second it was just a general intrigue presented by the music that enhanced it.