Perhaps becoming the
only liaison between the left brain and an general understanding of the art
world, this comparison clearly illustrates the misfortunes of the right-brained
population. We are expected to learn through means that are no longer relevant
to the world in which we live. The simile presented by Gude continues on,
saying that science students would be in the same boat if they were asked to
learn all outdated theories prior to the widely accepted ones (2013, p.12).
Evidently, this is not the way the science field works. Scientific progress has
shattered the public’s expectations since the age of the Space Race—turning the
impossible into factual accounts. This feat was made possible by the
ever-contemporizing science curricula in schools. Art, however, has stayed in
the shadows, as standard curricula stay in place for generations. You begin by
learning the artists’ names, their typical styles, facts about their life, and then
reproduce aworkt in their personal style. Has this gap between the creative and
academic sides of education prevented art from progressing in the past half a
century? Would “modern art” look completely different had a progressive
curriculum come into play at the same time scientists were cruising through the
stratosphere?
 |
| Some Minimalist art, like the allegory above, contributes to the general public's misunderstanding of Modern Art. If art ed. had more progressive styles during the twentieth century forward, do you think modern art would have been different? (Pinterest) |
Hypothetically speaking, if art had been as concretely progressive as science-based successes—meaning
advancements in art education would have been more visible to those out of the
art realm—it could have potentially bridged the gap between the world of fact
and fiction. In other words, the stories that artists tell in the world that
they create could have become integrated with reality. Their realness could
have been emphasized even to non-art lovers, perhaps, by functionality.
Teaching art students to bring their work to life via some sort of function
relative to their environment could have interwoven science and art together in
a long-lasting marriage. If all blueprints for art projects looked like the
pages of DaVinci’s sketchbooks, imagine what could result from that.
This is not to say that art education has not made leaps and bounds since the mid-twentieth century, because it has. And this is not to say that science is any more important than the arts or vice versa. Rather, the metamorphosis in academic curricula that has created so much positive change needs to permeate through art education as well. Yes, new art-based jobs have formed in recent decades, but how many students know jobs like this exist [until they attempt to pursue art on a college level]? Very few. Gude recognizes that “contemporary theories of making meaning recognize all meaning making involves borrowing from previous meanings” (2013, p. 12). If we are forever taught that jobs post-college will not exist in art—essentially that the subject we’re most passionate about has no meaning from the get-go—how can we be expected to make meaning aside from these previous assumptions? And without the drive to make meaning aside from these previous meanings, the community of artists, both presently and in the future, certainly doesn’t have the means to make progress.
Gude, Olivia (2013). New School Art Styles: The Project of Art Education. Art Education.
This is not to say that art education has not made leaps and bounds since the mid-twentieth century, because it has. And this is not to say that science is any more important than the arts or vice versa. Rather, the metamorphosis in academic curricula that has created so much positive change needs to permeate through art education as well. Yes, new art-based jobs have formed in recent decades, but how many students know jobs like this exist [until they attempt to pursue art on a college level]? Very few. Gude recognizes that “contemporary theories of making meaning recognize all meaning making involves borrowing from previous meanings” (2013, p. 12). If we are forever taught that jobs post-college will not exist in art—essentially that the subject we’re most passionate about has no meaning from the get-go—how can we be expected to make meaning aside from these previous assumptions? And without the drive to make meaning aside from these previous meanings, the community of artists, both presently and in the future, certainly doesn’t have the means to make progress.
Gude, Olivia (2013). New School Art Styles: The Project of Art Education. Art Education.
Like you point out in your introduction, I too experienced doubt. And the most doubt came from my guidance counselor! In tenth grade (I will never forget about this experience as long as I live), I walked in to my guidance counselor's office for a career meeting which was required of every student. I told her my plans to go to college for art, and she told me that I would become a starving artist or live in my parent's basement for the rest of my life. How sad is that!?
ReplyDeleteI agree with you in that change needs to happen in the art classroom. We need to make students, as well as parents, more aware of the career options that are available in art. We need to make meaning for our students. The support from all fellow faculty would be helpful as well, encouraging students to explore what is really out there. Making progress about art more "visible" and accessible to the public may someday encourage people to want to explore their options a little further.