I agree with you about not just teaching E&P. But it is a part of what
I teach. When children are learning to look at art, make art, etc., I
think awarenes of composition as well as meaning are both important.
It's much more interesting to get kids to interpret what they think the
work is about, symbolism, etc. But everything we see can be broken down
into E&P, and it is a way to slow kids down and make them look at
something rather than just say "That's stupid, or I don't like that,".
I find that kids discover the meaning of work AS we are describing it
and analyzing the way the artist has put the work together. Some kids
inately understand composition and others really are clueless until they
learn about choices regarding ways to organize space, create emphasis,
vary line quality, make their color pop or be more subdued, etc. I
think E&P is just one part of art analaysis and interpretation. It's
about structure. The most exciting part of interpreting art is the
meaning and the message, but too many kids are impatient with looking
and need to be slowed down to really see art. A strong composition can
also be breathtaking to me. I enjoy seeing my students learning about
depth and ways to create rhythm or movement in their work, etc. but the
meanings that they put into their work are equally if not much more
interesting. I think that all of these things together are what makes
learning about art fun. YOu are so right , though that a course that is
totally centered on E&P would be boring and missng the point of art.