Week 1 - Survey of Art Education

Gude vs. Kamhi

Rescuing Art From Visual Culture Studies

Michelle Marter Kamhi

“The Visual Culture movement is primarily social and political in its motivation, aiming quite explicitly at the "reconstruction" of American society. Its influence is not only likely to dull the next generation's esthetic sensibilities, and further debase the general level of culture, but may extend far beyond the arts themselves… in its aims as well as its methods, Visual Culture Studies has no place in art education.”

Visual culture exists inevitably (socially and politically), therefore if person seeks to develop intellectually/aesthetically to their full potential, they must learn to become visually literate in order to properly and discerningly engage in this visual culture. 

What, then is art?  An object on a pedestal?  A distant work to be admired from a far? Or an attribute of every day life that we engage with to help us understand the culture we live within (our community), as well as to understand other cultures.

“From the standpoint of art education, the overriding objection to this movement is its blatant disregard of essential differences between works of visual art and other types of cultural artifacts. By visual art, I mean what is broadly termed "painting" and "sculpture" (traditionally termed fine art): that is, two- and three-dimensional re-creations of reality whose purpose is to concretize ideas and values in an emotionally compelling form.”

I would argue, What better way to understand a culture’s “values” than by learning about the objects (cultural artifacts) they deem “valuable.”

“Further, the "decoding" undertaken in Visual Culture Studies emphasizes abstract social and political issues at the expense of more concrete personal experience. Lamenting that "the [personal] consequences of racial stereotyping are dreadful," Barrett claims that "the teachers [who] interpreted Cut and Paste . . . were in a position to intellectually and emotionally identify with the tragic meaning of the artwork." Yet the work itself fails to convey anything of the personal or emotional dimension of racial bias--whether of the anguished feelings of exclusion and debasement it often engenders, or of the dignity that may be maintained in spite of it, nor of the impassioned sense of outrage and rebellion it can inspire. The viewer must imagine such things for himself, lacking the stimulus that the sensitive concretization in a work of art might afford.”

Kamhi is asking that art be overt not only in its subject matter and form, but it in its content, as well.  Furthermore, these components of the artwork must transcend their physical manifestation to meet her expectations of a “personal experience.”  Which, of course, by her definition in this paragraph is, in fact, personal – pertaining to one individual.  She recommends art not challenge its viewer to interpret the work for themselves, but rather supply them with an impersonal emotional reaction in the most mechanical, formulaic sense.   

In addition, Kamhi is asking for more personal experience while taking away those aspects (social and political issues) that give us context in which to have experience and emotion.    

“The Visual Culture Studies approach tends to view the world in terms of competing interest groups, and wrongly assumes that all individuals within a given group necessarily share the same set of values and concerns…”

            This is exactly what she is doing, by assuming that every artist should desire to make art solely to celebrate the harmonious aspects of humanity, and never aspire to raise awareness of issues in society, solve problems, or seek change through their work. 

“The main emotions inspired by the Visual Culture approach are all on the side of anger, resentment, and moral outrage, leaving little place for such feelings as love, pride, compassion, admiration, tenderness, courage, grief, hope, honor, reverence, or joy.”

What an extreme, over arching, misinformed, blanket statement on Visual Culture.  

“[joy] emerges from the profound psychological need to see our ideas and feelings about the world projected into sensory form, and it contributes in important ways to the well-being of the individual, as neurologist Oliver Sacks has eloquently testified in accounts of diverse patients he has observed. Such feelings can only be stifled by the detached, analytical approach adopted in Visual Culture Studies.”

I would say, such feelings can only be stifled by someone limiting an individual’s ideas and feelings about the world to only positive ones. 

“I have argued that postmodernist genres such as "Pop art," "installation art," and "video art" have nothing essential in common with the traditional visual arts and therefore should not be classified or studied with them as "art.”

Never mind the fact that these postmodernist genres have the word “art” in common with traditional visual arts, and yet should not be defined as such?  Intelligent and creative approaches are thinking too far outside Kamhi’s box. 

“A work of art is the product of an artist's personal engagement with the subject matter at hand, and the process of making it is painstakingly selective and searching, as well as relatively fluid…It reflects what the artist regards as important in human life or in his conception of the divine or supernatural realm. In some measure, every artist is engaged, albeit most often subconsciously, with such questions as, What aspects of human experience do I regard as important? What is worth remembering? What do I value--or abhor? Finally, during the creative process, an artist is concerned first and foremost with getting the work right in his own judgment. Though he may refer to such things as aiming to please God--or the gods--the work is nonetheless governed by his own conception of what will best achieve that end. At every stage of the work, the implicit question is, Does this "say" what I think it should?”

After she just finished saying that artists should only make art on what is harmonious within humanity, rather than political or social issues. 

“Further, while one assumes that everything about a painting is the result of choices made by the artist, one can never be sure, in looking at a photograph, which aspects were selected as important or meaningful by the photographer, and which were accidental or incidental. Chance always plays a part in photography, and it often plays a very great part, even in photographs that are highly valued. The historic photograph of the American flag-raising at Iwo Jima, for example, was shot under such chaotic conditions of battle that when the photographer snapped the picture he was exercising virtually no control, unable even to compose the scene through the viewfinder, as he later recounted. Many fine photographs are largely lucky accidents of this kind, whereas no true work of art ever is. No thoughtful viewer should ignore this distinction.”

“Teachers who emphasize the need to help students "decode" images place an undue emphasis on symbolic content. A painting often cited in this regard is Jan van Eyck's justly famed wedding portrait of Giovanni Arnolfini and his young bride, Jeanne Cenami. True, van Eyck included many details having symbolic as well as natural meaning--from the figure of a little dog, as a sign of fidelity, to the burning of a solitary candle, signifying the all-seeing Christ--all indicating the sacramental character of the image as bearing witness to the Catholic union of this couple. Knowledge of these symbols can indeed enrich one's understanding of the painting. The primary power of the work derives not from such symbolic content, however, but rather from its "natural" subject matter, its depictive and expressive qualities--such as the sober, intensely serious facial expressions of the young couple, their gesture of joining hands, and the aura of tranquil solemnity in the elegant bedchamber. Those are the qualities that make it a great work of art, a deeply moving image which transcends the particular historic moment being represented and conveys something about the gravity and importance of marriage in general. Unlike the symbolic elements, these qualities require no "decoding": they are immediately and naturally accessible to attentive viewers. And it is such qualities, in my view, that art teachers should be most concerned with encouraging their students to be aware of and respond to.”

I do not believe there is a hierarchy of elements within a painting.  There may be a focal point or an intended meaning in the work (decoding or no decoding), but I believe every aspect in the work is equally significant in expressing its content to the viewer.  Each aspect of the artwork informs and transforms the other, hopefully leading to visual unity. 

“Modernist and postmodernist work has so dominated thinking about art in recent years that many teachers have lost sight of the expressive qualities of true art”

True art being only painting and sculpture?

“The subjects and themes that have most inspired painters and sculptors across the ages have remained remarkably similar, however different they may be in their treatment. They pertain to certain universals of our human condition--universals that transcend the currently politicized issues of race, gender, and social class that have increasingly but mistakenly become the focus of art education.”

It seems as though Kamhi doesn’t have an understanding of humanity or the human condition.  Or art.

New School Art Styles: The Project of Art Education

Olivia Gude

            In the first paragraph, the article establishes that the goal of art education is to create possibilities for free expression for youth.  The problem discussed in the article is that “the school art style does not seem to be a pedagogical tool for teaching children about art in the world beyond the school, though this is its manifest function.”  Art activities in school don’t seem to be supporting creative self-expression.  The questions becomes: Can art projects made in schools provide opportunities for students to truly explore personally meaningful subjects while supporting clear learning objectives about art content?  Is this the goal of art education? 

            The article describes the ideal art classroom as one where students are given the freedom to pursue their own creative agendas, however, this style of school art curriculum seems unlikely to be productive, as most students could not initially make good use of this kind of freedom.  It helps if students are introduced to a wide range of meaning making strategies throughout the curriculum in the art classroom. 

            “Good art projects encode complex aesthetic strategies, giving students tools to investigate and make meaning.”  Instead of teaching to a final product, or teaching to symbolize a theme, Gude discusses three strategic goals for curriculum that authentically engage students: “1) the use of discipline-centered inquiry, 2) the construction of knowledge (rather than its passive acceptance), and 3) teaching and learning that make connections beyond school.”  Through these strategies it is important to introduce students to a “wide-range of developmentally appropriate aesthetic practices—means of artmaking based in particular methodologies of experiencing, producing, making meaning, and interpreting.”  This will allow students to utilize their aesthetic sensibilities outside the classroom, allowing them to investigate and make meaning on their own. 

            The section on “Engaging in authentic artistic processes over making facsimiles” was especially helpful for me, as I am teaching this Intro to Art course.  Each unit is centered on an element such as line, texture, color, etc.  So, I gained a lot from reading her ideas on teaching about Line (because that is actually the unit we started this week in my class).  For example, instead of teaching students to match a type of line to a corresponding emotion (which is problematic in that it teaches students that there is a simple one-to-one correspondence between form and meaning), it would be more helpful to have students make as many different kinds of lines as they can. 

            Gude discusses the problem with rule-bound projects in which the teacher determines most of what the student creates.  These types of projects don’t “integrate learning arts vocabulary with exploring how such visual principles operate to generate meaning in actual art and design practices.”  It is important to allow students to create something meaningful to them.  “How can you determine what is ‘good composition’ or the ‘right color’ if visual organization is not at the service of some desired communication?”  Gude elaborates by discussing the proper way to assess assignments that incorporate the learning of art vocabulary.  She recommends “asking students to utilize art vocabulary to explain choices in their artmaking,” instead of creating a rubric that specifies the formal characteristics that must be displayed for this is neither good, authentic assessment, nor good authentic artmaking. 

            “Good art—and good art projects—transform the way in which we understand and process life experiences.”  Therefore, artistic practices in schools must be open-ended and capable of making new contemporary meaning for the student.