Reviews and Responses: Bowers’ Elements of a Post-Liberal Theory of Education

Book review for Elements of a Post-Liberal Theory of Education, C.A. Bowers, Teachers College Press, New York, 1987

Campus Art Museums in the 21st Century: A Conversation

In the summer of 2012, the authors of this study brought together a group of campus art museum directors and outside experts to 'think out loud' about the changes already occurring at campus museums and where new opportunities and roles may be emerging. We hope the resulting paper will further the field's larger, continuing exploration of its roles and potentials through dialogue, research, and experimentation -- an exploration that contributes to the continued healthy evolution of campus art museum practice

Examining Environmental Advertising Imagery Through Art Education

This is an examination of advertising imagery in the United States, with particular emphasis on outdoor advertising, and a proposal for an art curriculum focused on advertising awareness. The method is socially-oriented art criticism funded by some history of advertising and the psychology and philosophy of persuasive, manipulative, and pecuniary symbolism. The intent is first to decode the aesthetic environment (Barbosa, 1988) and then present a structure that helps art students to do the same. The examination begins with the object and returns to the object for validation (Ecker and Kaelin, 1970), but ends with an understanding of personal experience, values, and social attitudes” (Nadaner, 1985, p. 12). It is what Jagodzinski (1983) calls making the unconscious conscious

Hold the Pickles, Hold the Lettuce, Special Orders Do Upset Us: The Franchise System in American Art Education

I have a history of advocating locally specific art content as very important to the construction of art curricula. This position arises from my readings in the area of socially contextual aesthetics. By art content I mean not only thematic content but also formal qualities, media, and technical execution all of which contribute to an artwork\u27s style. By locally specific art content I mean the style of the work as it arises from a specific place at a specific time, and which in some way reflects the collective consciousness of the culture or subculture of the work\u27s genesis. If one believes with Dewey that aesthetic expressions arises in the context of interaction with the environment, and with Langer that the subconscious/unconscious style of an age is given form by the artist through transformation of this subliminal feeling into concrete form, and if one further believes that the transformation of subjective experience into concrete aesthetic form is an ultimate value of making art, then it follows that artists ( and student artists) must be allowed to express how it feels to be who they are, and what it is like to live their lives. This mandates locally specific art content. If artists are allowed to focus on locally specific content, art becomes the reflection, manifestation, clarification, transformation and continuation of culture. If content comes from the outside, it has not vital connection to an individual\u27s life processes and becomes mere decoration. As an advocate of this position I was naturally pleased when asked to contribute to a Caucus panel discussion, in Miami, on the subject of how the content of my art curriculum has changed as I have changed geophysical and cultural environment in my teaching career. The initial guiding assumption, then, is that with each change in the geophysical, social, and cultural context comes a corresponding change in my curricular content

The Feldman Method of Art Criticism: Is it Adequate for the Socially Concerned Art Educator?

The structure and inherent values of the Feldman (1981) method of art criticism are debated in some art education circles. On one hand it is argued that the Feldman method, because of its emphasis on formal analysis, lends itself more readily to analytical formalist criticism, and is thus not an adequate instrument for socially concerned art educators. The other side of the debate has it that the method is appropriate for socially contextual interpretation when applied by socially concerned art educators. My thesis is that Feldman\u27s method is well suited for socially contextual criticism of aesthetic forms. I intend to develop this thesis through examining the structure of the method, the context from which it has arisen including the general historical context, the propensities of Feldman\u27s writings not directly related to art criticism, the ways in which Feldman has used the method, and finally through explication of my own socially-centered use of it

Art, Education, and the Bomb: Reflections on an International Children’s Peace Mural Project

As a community muralist (T. Anderson, 1985) and contextualist I believe that the purpose of art is communication from one human being to another about things that count (R. Anderson, 1990; Dissanayake, 1988; Lippard, 1990). This does not mean that we disregard the aesthetic component—the “wonder”—in an artwork. Rather, it implies that the aesthetic serves an extrinsic function beyond its supposed raison d’être. That function, which is usually both prosaic and symbolic, is to serve as a marker that in some way defines the people who make, use, and view artworks or aesthetically framed objects (R. Anderson, 1990). Art is something people do to give them a sense of themselves, both as a result of the product and the process. Thus, we may use artworks as vehicles for understanding human nature through their displayed visual qualities, the forming process, and their social context (T. Anderson, 1995). This paper follows from that premise. I will consider the reasons for the peace mural project, the processes involved, and the murals’ compositions and stylistic qualities as manifestations and means of initial ingress toward understanding the cultures and people from which they arise. My belief is that peace rests on intercultural understanding and one way to approach such understanding is through art

Thought on Social Contextualism in Art and Art Education

Art as a manifestation and reflect ion of culture has been clearly established. Discussions of various depth on the subject are available in many general art education texts. However, the concept of art as a reflection of culture may take many forms and thus has the potential for ambiguity. Culture, as defined by the social sciences, is the complex of knowledge, beliefs, mores, customs, laws, and social institutions held by human beings as a part of society. Culture, in this sense, does not refer to what is commonly known as high culture, except as high culture is included in the larger complex defined above. Thus, art as a reflection of culture does not refer to the state of understanding, appreciating, and collecting art as a manifestation of good taste, aesthetic education, social position, or wealth. Rather, it refers to the mirroring of the human condition as this condition is formed through its social institutions. Art when broadly viewed as a reflection of culture creates opportunities to understand our world, to understand oneself, and to understand the qualities inherent in an artwork. A socially defined art curriculum can serve as a catalyst for the development of students’ sensibilities. This requirement is most fully met when all aspects of making, talking about, and appreciating art are incorporated into an organically structured integrally related program

Premises, Promises, and a Piece of Pie: A Social Analysis of Art in General Education

It is argued that advocates of content-based art education and other art educators who are attempting to move art to the political center of general education are struggling against largely unrecognized social realities. The idea is developed that just as the art world occupies a marginal place in the larger society do does art education in the society\u27s educational institutions. The roots of this marginalization are argued to be in contending; particularly the dearly held notions of creativity and originality which are at the heart of the art world, versus acquiescence and conformity which are held most dear within general education. It is concluded that art will never be at the political center of general education, and rightfully so, because the institutional goaIs of art education and general education are not the same