Commencement address given by Harold Howe II, U. S. Commissioner of Education, to the Spring 1967 graduating class of The Ohio State University, Ohio Stadium, Columbus, Ohio, June 13, 1967

Howe, Harold, 1918-

KnowledgeBank at OSU

AESTHETICS AND THE NATIONAL INTEREST* An Address by Harold Howe I I U.S. Commissioner of Education Department of Health, Education, and Welfare Just as auto-makers sta r t tooling up for a new model about two years ahead of time, commencement speakers sta r t revving up for June graduations about six months i n advance. So I was delighted when President Fawcett invited me to address you today, because I had been drafting i n my mind a ringing commencement speech. I t was e n t i t l e d " P e r i l and Promise," and i t said that now you are standing on the shores of the vast Sea of L i f e and w i l l have to navigate these uncharted waters without the help of your par-ents, professors, and other old sal t s who have gone before you. The speech noted that the Sea of L i f e i s fraught with challenges and dangers, and i t ran only 1*7 minutes. Unfortunately, President Fawcett pointed out i n his l e t t e r of i n v i -t a t i o n that "We always suggest to our speakers that t h e i r remarks be limited to about twenty minutes." So you w i l l not get the " P e r i l and Promise" speech today. I think you ought to remember, as you say good-bye t o Columbus, that President Fawcett stood up for your interests to the very l a s t minute of his j u r i s d i c t i o n over you. Since you are confronted with the United States Commissioner of Education, you w i l l not be surprised to learn that the alternative topic I have chosen has much to do with education. S p e c i f i c a l l y , I wish to talk about the state of the humanities and the arts i n our culture, the ways i n which we might extend t h e i r values to every part of our society, and your role i n doing exactly that. Certainly i t i s a major function of •Before the Annual Commencement, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, 9 a.m., Tuesday, June 13, 1967. - 2 -education to foster humanistic values, to help create the kind of s o c i a l and i n t e l l e c t u a l climate i n which the aesthetic sense w i l l f l o u r i s h . And yet, I believe, our educational system i s f a i l i n g to discharge t h i s function with anything l i k e the imagination and ingenuity the task deserves. You may wonder why I raise t h i s matter on a day which signals, for many of you, your l a s t formal encounter with formal education. I do so because education i n t h i s country has always been run by c i t i z e n s , and since most of you are 21, you have the rig h t to help run i t along with a l l the other voters. You are going to pay for i t , and the day w i l l come when you have a normal c u r i o s i t y about what i s being done with your tax d o l l a r s . Further, a number of research studies have shown that college-educated men and women have a tendency to get married. Most of you, i n sum, are going to wind up being parents i f you haven't reached that joyous and f r u s t r a t i n g state already. Your children w i l l consider being over 30 years old as only a l i t t l e better than being dead, they w i l l f i n d many of your b e l i e f s and preferences vastly amusing, and they w i l l regard you as quaint mementos of a bygone age, l i k e valentines from the 19th century. Despite t h e i r disdain for your views, you w i l l care about them very much. Hence you w i l l care about the schools and colleges they go to and about the values these i n s t i t u t i o n s transmit. Speakers who take up the cause of the humanities and the arts these days tend to polarize t h e i r thinking. By that I mean they seldom l i m i t themselves to encouraging our a r t i s t i c and c u l t u r a l achievements. They must at the same time disparage our 20th century love a f f a i r with science and technological gadgetry. They affirm the s p i r i t of humanism, but i n a - 3 -manner which makes i t sound as i f humanism i s somehow opposed to the s p i r i t of science. I t i s obvious that we have placed far greater emphasis on the c o n t r i -butions of science i n our time than on the contributions of the arts and humanities. The s c i e n t i f i c and technological revolution has i n our lifetimes been a dominant, energizing force i n our society. I t has created much of our wealth, helped develop and sustain our prominence among the nations of the world, and created a host of new Jobs and s k i l l s while making many others obsolete. In short, i t has usually been i n the national interest as w e l l as i n the i n d i v i d u a l interest to support the things of science, because they are useful and necessary to the human condition i n the Twentieth Century. But t h i s support of science has also forwarded the arts and humanities. The a r t i s t i c and c u l t u r a l renaissance which many believe i s developing across the country today owes much to s c i e n t i f i c and technological achievement. Mass production and d i s t r i b u t i o n have made the products of a r t i s t i c endeavor available to larger audiences. More people attend c u l t u r a l events today than did 25 years ago, i f for no other reason than because there are more automobiles and busses and subways to get them there and more t e l e v i s i o n sets to get the events into t h e i r homes. I do not mean to suggest that technological progress alone can be credited with the Uo,000 t h e a t r i c a l groups, the 1,U00 symphony orchestras or the 5,COO museums which exist i n the country today. But at least some of the 300 m i l l i o n v i s i t s by Americans to those 5,000 museums last, year were assisted by technology. Furthermore, the host of new c u l t u r a l centers themselves r e f l e c t , to some extent, the achievements of the new -1+ -technology -- not to mention the po t e n t i a l , s t i l l only p a r t i a l l y r e a l i z e d , of the new a r t i s t i c media represented by t e l e v i s i o n and the motion picture. In the f i e l d of education, we are beginning to face up to the new technology and explore ways of using i t ; I believe i t ' s time the a r t i s t and humanist did the same thing. Some c r i t i c s see grave dangers i n the production of art for large masses of people. One has ca l l e d t h i s "the triumph of masscult," claiming that art for the masses doesn't have even a theoretical chance of being good because i t must be watered down to the lowest common denominator of popular taste. As a democratic optimist, I do not agree. Certainly technology has resulted on the one hand i n the mass d i s t r i b u t i o n of a great deal of pseudo-artistic junk. You can go into any large drug store today and fin d "paintings" for sale at about the same price you pay for a case of beer, and much of th i s stuff — those ersatz paintings of Pari s , for example, with the gaslights reflected on the r a i n - s l i c k pavement, and a gendarme on a bicycle ~ much of th i s stuff r e a l l y ought to be mounted for use as dart-boards. But so what? You can also buy — for the same pr i c e , and often i n the same place — reasonably good reproductions of excellent a r t . People who, 25 years ago, would never consider attending a symphony do so today because inexpensive recordings brought good music into t h e i r homes and gave them an appetite for more. The same publishing technology which prints and distributes eminently forgettable trash also supports good writers who would not otherwise have a s u f f i c i e n t l y large audience to keep a roof over t h e i r heads and a ribbon i n t h e i r typewriters. The - 5 -educated minority of a century ago bought an awful l o t of junk, too. Nor do I f i n d persuasive the argument that the popular success of culture-trash must necessarily drive fine work from the book-racks and record-stores. I f we are to be concerned about the quality of popular taste, then, we should not worry about the technology which has made both good and bad art so widely available. Rather, we should worry about the process by which taste i n the humanities and arts i s formed, and that process obviously includes the teaching offered i n the schools and colleges. Our educational i n s t i t u t i o n s have accepted t h e i r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to inform the i n t e l l e c t and communicate knowledge; but I believe that they have f a i l e d i n t h e i r respon-s i b i l i t y to shape taste, i n any area but that of l i t e r a t u r e and that they could do better with that. Unless the schools of our Nation change i n the years before your children start f i r s t grade, your children w i l l be shortchanged i n the learning s k i l l s and appreciation which represent man's most c i v i l i z e d e f f o r t s . Although there are exceptions to th i s statement, i n the main i t i s an accurate appraisal of current practice i n our public schools, which seem to regard as " f r i l l s " any serious and consistent programs i n a r t , music, drama, sculpture, and dance. We do s l i g h t l y better i n our colleges and universities -- but even here, I believe, there i s more shadow than substance. Our l i b e r a l arts t r a d i t i o n makes a cafeteria of arts and humanities courses available to students. But mounting pressures from what we c a l l " p r a c t i c a l " or "professional" education either drive students away from these studies or else change the nature of the studies so that they serve aspirants for Ph.D. degrees rather than the broad interests of a l i b e r a l education. - 6 -This i s esp e c i a l l y the case i n the education of teachers. Unless they have the chance to develop f a m i l i a r i t y and ease with the humanities and the a r t s , there i s no reason to expect them to convey an aesthetic sense to t h e i r future pupils. I f the a r t i s t and the values he represents are as important as we profess them to be, what can you and I do to make the formal educational system more receptive to h i s work and point of view? For one thing, we can involve more of our a r t i s t s — present and future — i n the process of education. In the term " a r t i s t s , " I would include sculptors, dancers, actors, designers, architects -- a l l those concerned with making the world i n which we l i v e more meaningful, more v i s u a l l y and a u r a l l y e x c i t i n g . At the elementary and secondary l e v e l s , t h i s would doubtless mean waiving some of the t r a d i t i o n a l requirements for teacher q u a l i f i c a t i o n . I t would mean allowing professional a r t i s t s to work i n the schools to teach both students and teachers; and at the same time, learn from the teachers what they know about children and educational growth. At the college l e v e l , I think we must make the artist-in-residence a member i n f u l l standing of the academic community, not a kind of curious e x h i b i t . Why do we say "artlst-in-resldence" at a l l ? The p h y s i c i s t s , the economists, the h i s t o r i a n s , the university doctor, the f o o t b a l l coach, the dean of men, and the president are most surely " i n residence." This term "artist-in-residence" to me suggests the university's i n t u i t i v e suspicion that the a r t i s t does not r e a l l y belong here; he i s considered a b i r d of passage, l i k e l y to be st a r t l e d by sudden noises or the well-meaning attempts of administrators to feed him. - 7 -There i s , of course, ample reason for t h i s i n s t i t u t i o n a l i n t u i t i o n that the a r t i s t does not r e a l l y "belong" on the campus. Usually he doesn't have a Ph.D., and usually he does not display the least tendency to get one. He does not have the normal credentials for teaching i n a university, and he frequently displays e c c e n t r i c i t i e s which annoy the trustees. Here the obvious problem i s with the credentials and the trustees, not with the a r t i s t . I f educational i n s t i t u t i o n s continue to elaim, as they do now, that shaping the aesthetic sense i s among t h e i r goals, they must welcome the practicing a r t i s t to thei r campuses. They must, more-over, involve him i n the education of a l l interested students, not merely i n the inst r u c t i o n of the a r t i s t i c a l l y talented. I speak of the a r t i s t i n the singular, but these same observations hold for groups of a r t i s t s , such as companies of actors. Colleges and uni v e r s i t i e s should work out new relationships with such groups, i n v i t i n g them to make the campus thei r performing home, and at the same time giving the entire student body a new sense of what the creative a r t i s t i s about. While they are about i t , colleges and universities must abandon the second class citizenship they assign to the arts when they make them i n large part a non-credit, extracurricular function. F i n a l l y , we should make the university environment congenial for the future a r t i s t , as wel l as for the active professional. This means revising the college admissions process. As now practiced, t h i s screening rewards the academically talented high school student at the expense of the a r t i s t i c a l l y talented. College admissions requirements and the achievement tests that help admissions directors make t h e i r decisions - 8 -r a r e l y r e f l e c t any interest i n non-academic, a r t i s t i c pursuits. A high school student with a genuine and obvious talent for painting r a r e l y receives any credit for t h i s talent from college admissions o f f i c e r s . The most you can say about his a r t i s t i c a b i l i t y i s that i t won't po s i t i v e l y hurt him -- as long as he got a "B" average i n everything else, including driver-training and personal hygiene. The notion that the aesthetic sense i s c r u c i a l to the quality of a person's future l i f e , and hence to his education, i s not reflected i n the standard admissions process today. Moreover, the effect of the admissions process spreads downward into our high schools, which adjust the i r c u r r i c u l a r offerings to those matters colleges care about, A would-be Michelangelo might have a chance i f he can play f o o t b a l l . Otherwise he'd better forget about college. A l l these observations may strike you as the ramblings of an educator worrying about h i s narrow, personal concerns — a speech, i n b r i e f , better suited to a faculty convention than to a commencement exercise. And yet a concern for aesthetic values has a direct bearing on your future l i v e s , and a lack of i t i n enough Americans has made a great difference to our present l i v e s . I t would be possible for you to spend your next forty or f i f t y years i n an atmosphere of increasing ugliness and tastelessness — and not minding. Or i t would be alternatively possible for you to recognize the problem and do something about i t . A l l of you will. b e taxpayers. Many of you w i l l be members of a Parent-Teachers Association. A large number of you w i l l be school board members. And some of you w i l l be active i n education as teachers or administrators or college trustees. In a l l these roles you can shape attitudes toward the a r t i s t and his r e l a t i o n to education. - 10 -than finding the lowest cost per square foot. I t would mean taxpayers who believe that i f we're going to put up public housing, we might as w e l l do i t r i g h t , and erect handsome structures that w i l l s t i l l be good-looking 20 years from now, rather than replacing slum tenements with a more modern slum. I t would mean ci t i z e n s who believe that architecture can appropriately go beyond putting up a glass-and-steel box with some Greek nymphs out i n front spouting water out of th e i r mouths and holding concrete cornucopias f i l l e d with plaster grapes and cement pineapples. I t would mean, i n sum, a generation of Americans with a sharpened sense of taste and a concern for excellence i n every aspect of t h e i r l i v e s . Perhaps for some of you — p a r t i c u l a r l y those young men shortly expecting greetings from the l o c a l draft board — concern f o r aesthetic values may seem remote and perhaps Irrelevant. Our attention i s more immediately drawn to the f r u s t r a t i o n and violence that beset our c i t i e s at home and the dangerous and demanding struggles that confront us abroad. In such a time of c o n f l i c t , there i s always the r i s k that the essence of c i v i l i z a t i o n w i l l be a casualty. And yet i t i s man's expression of the c i v i l i z e d and the b e a u t i f u l that makes the pain and s a c r i f i c e s of c o n f l i c t endurable. I t i s t h i s expression that gives us a sense of continuity with the best In our past and a new v i s i o n of the future. At a time i n our history when we confront dissentlon and violence at home and abroad, we had best remember to pre-serve those elements of art and thought which constitute mankind's noblest achievements. ### 

Aesthetics and the National Interest

https://kb.osu.edu/bitstream/1811/53863/1/ARV_Commencement_1967_Spring_Howe.pdf

Aesthetics and the National Interest

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

KnowledgeBank at OSU