I would like your input in this issue, since art as a public school subject has been questioned where I live, and perhaps in other locations in the world too.
So what are the arguments for and against art-classes?

What purpose does it serve for the majority of children who will not in any way work with art in its most apparent way?

My argument for preserving art-classes is that it keeps the creative mind active and an active creative mind also means an active intelligence. Art demands seeking solutions to problems, seeing patterns, trying new ways of expression.

It also serves the purpose as a psychological self-help method, many issues can be dealt with through art, by creating and then analyzing.

The society needs more creative people, especially among politicians and scientists, to name a few. Art promotes creativity, intelligence and mental health, even just when viewed.

Let's hear you now.

:)

I have no problem with art classes, except that they are often far too much a class. As a writer, the very phrase "creative writing class" makes me roll my eyes... you can't teach creativity.

Art is great, but I don't think class is the right term for anything that anyone has a right to be doing with someone else's creativity.

You sound like someone who's not adequately educated on the subjects of art and literature, beryl.

I mean, neither am I, but I've learned enough to know that being "super creative" isn't enough to be a great artist and certainly not enough to be a great writer.

Art promotes creativity, intelligence and mental health, even just when viewed.

Physical activity is 10x more effective at developing those things. If you have a strong and healthy body, creativity forms naturally and kids learn to think for themselves.

I dunno...to me art class always seemed like more of a place to zone out than develop intellectual skills (many art teachers are complete idiots who've done waaaaaaay too many drugs.) Kids only learn creativity out of necessity, ie gaining access to the cookie jar, or bypassing security systems of a major government entity.

I learn more when I really really want something. Then again, the courses I detested most turned out to be the ones which I gained the greatest 'creativity' from. And they don't seem as boring anymore.

What purpose does it serve for the majority of children who will not in any way work with art in its most apparent way?


I've taken a bunch of art classes throughout high school, and a reason I can think of for keeping art classes available is that they are kind of a stress reliever. My school has 4 classes, 1h 30m each, a day and even with only 4 classes that need to be dealt with there is a major workload. In an art class, there's a considerably less stressful workplace compared to the traditional "academic" classes. Every art teacher I've met or had is even more laid back than other teachers, not to say they don't work as much or are lazy. Having an art class juxtaposed against all the other classes of strictly following directions, doing things according to rubrics, having to sit in a chair for an hour and a half, having to almost pity these teachers because of how and what they are told to teach according to the region's board of education - an art class is an opportunity to step back and "get the bigger picture" of things.

Something every art class I've taken teaches about composition (aesthics). Even if a kid will never have a job or hobby intwined in some form of traditional art, having an aesthic awareness for things is beneficial. In the business realm, putting together reports, charts, or graphs and having them look good is a must. That's all about the composition of what you're putting together; creating art gives kids experience and training with composing something visual.

A really bad side to art classes is that they are super expensive, and anybody learning art wastes a lot of stuff. Different types of paints are expensive (and wasted a lot by inexperienced students), canvas, paintbrushes (abused by inexperience too)...any quality art supplies are going to cost a bit.

the art teacher at my school is a total idiot, so i wouldnt know what a proper art class is like. but as for stress releif, i find that classes where i am using my brain relieve stress better.

Except once the pupils take their options in Yr 9 most of them will drop art. All I seem to remember from my art classes (my last one was only about a year ago) is
Trying to get my clay sculpture full of bubbles so it would crack into pieces in the kiln
One hell of a bitchy teacher
Things in the background are blue
Knives

Man art sucked.

keep art, creeativity, and get rid of schools and classes is what i say

that machine where they give art a token tolerated role is bogus, and kills all creativity. students are set against each other--as is the system's criteria for authenticity. there is no encouragement that creativity is as central to humanity as breathing
as some of you say, you see bored shitless tutors whose spirit has or is getting crushed by the system. that's th fukin idEA. they dont wat you to be REALLy creative. not as in really exploring behind the scenes. fuk me no!

I would like your input in this issue, since art as a public school subject has been questioned where I live, and perhaps in other locations in the world too.
So what are the arguments for and against art-classes?

What purpose does it serve for the majority of children who will not in any way work with art in its most apparent way?

My argument for preserving art-classes is that it keeps the creative mind active and an active creative mind also means an active intelligence. Art demands seeking solutions to problems, seeing patterns, trying new ways of expression.

It also serves the purpose as a psychological self-help method, many issues can be dealt with through art, by creating and then analyzing.

The society needs more creative people, especially among politicians and scientists, to name a few. Art promotes creativity, intelligence and mental health, even just when viewed.

Let's hear you now.

:)
Here is a personal story tha began as a tragedy. As a youth I like to draw and scribble like most pre-teens. I hit a wall and progress stopped. Not untl many many years later did I take a drawing class at the local community college. Heidi, my drawing instructor (and director of the art dept) made reference to "Drawing on the Right Side of Ythe Brain" and used the concept to disinguish between the verbal, math mind and the compare and spatial mind. To be brief, I learned to draw realistically which was always my first goal. As an adult my occasional attempts at drawing ended dismally in distorted faces, body parts, proprtion etc. But Heidi, bless her, aught me to draw and my life has changed as I now have another dimension to use when expressing myself.

As a joke I some times compare my work with one of the French Impressionists whose early work on human figures shows a badly distorted and amateurish rendering of a man with all the major limbs and body parts badly skewed (his early work is incomparble to that just 1 year later when a drawing angel had apparently taken over his body)..

When people look at my drawings covering the wall and remark about how some people have talent and regretted the lack of their own I simply tell them that I had to learn how to draw and that what they saw on the wall was more a projection of Heidi than myself.

Also, I explain that the part of me who draws is not that part of me that is talking to her. I always explain that "I" didn't draw the pictures, that is another part of me. If you want to talk to "him", the artist, then talk to the walls, as, interestingly enouigh, he has answered your qustions before they are asked.

Just a representative sample of some current doodling. (http://www.sciforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=3849&stc=1)

And adding some color to the tune . . . (http://www.sciforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=3850&stc=1)
The pictures are reduced by 1/4 from the originals in the computer so there is some distortion. There was a model in mind for 2nd piece.

The drawings were done from scratch (or memory) on my computer using "MS Paint", a fairly low level graphics program.

So art teaching in schools? You bet, as long as the art teacher knows how to draw on the right side of her brain.
Geistkiesel

Bebelina,

What you are really trying to say is that work that society deems art should be encouraged in school.

If I felt like doodling and splashing paint over canvas all day, I doubt my teacher would be too pleased. Therefore that rhetoric of it being a method of 'self expression' is bogus, the pressure is on the student to produce what may be considered good art.

Besides, mathematics is a better art form than artsy art. Less messy too.

Less messy too.
haha. Look at the mess they call 'string theory'

Thanks for your replies.
Especially yours, Geistkiesel, that was very fascinating. I have a feeling you will use your artistic talents in combination with science. Quantum art. You artistic self making a scientific drawing of your social self, guided by angels. It'll be wild. :D

I think you can teach creativity, it's called inspiring. It's etremely important that a teacher is inspiring, in all subjects. Of course creativity comes naturally too, it doesn't need teaching, but it can be taught. Like any other mindset.

It's clear that the nature of the art-class is determined by the teacher and can therefore vary a lot among personal experiences, from life-altering and inspiring to stressfull, meaningless and destructive ( although destruction is a form of creative expression too), from carefree and laid-back to strictly by the rules. But there must be some common solid ground that defines it's necessity, besides putting together reports... For what would the world be without art?

Physical activity should of course also be promoted, especially in USA. Fattest country in the world, no offense..
But one doesn't have to rule out the other, there's a special purpose for everything in existance.

Duendy, taking politics into art-class, nice done. It's all a huge conspiracy..lol. Maybe you're right.

Maybe the question can't be answered by thinking practical. Other dimensions of thought must be used. How would your dream art-class look like?

haha. Look at the mess they call 'string theory'
Hey, Xeres, why stop there, why not include it all Special Relativity Theory and Quantum Mechanics. If there ever was a confessed instance of recognized self-ignorance SouthStar just broke the record. Doodlig and splashing paint on canvass he avoids becuse this would not please his teacher.

Does anyone remember the expression, the form of the equation for solving for the description of achieving a high state of total self expression? I think it might be in some esoteric time differential equation form? Mmmm, yes . . .yes ... with all the special Hilbert space imperatives, and . . and ..yes with Hermitian conjugates, exactly? Oh yes, that one . .mmm it has a lot of Lagrangian multiplyers and matrix derivatives, I remember those for sure. Wow, I allmost forgot, it is essential that you keep off the Cauchy surface entirely do you understand(?), entirely, otherwise you risk the chance of an early collapse of your wave equation. We wouldn't want that now, would we?
Stargate has quite an addition problem there doesn't he?
Hey Stargate don't forget your book of Reynolds numbers.

Geistkiesel

If there ever was a confessed instance of recognized self-ignorance SouthStar just broke the record. Doodlig and splashing paint on canvass he avoids becuse this would not please his teacher.

And so your record of ad hominems continues..

In case your retardation impairs your literacy, I was referring to the fact that no matter how much an art student likes to "express" themselves, if it does not please the teacher, they do not make the grade. The pressure is on to make the grade, and thus please the teacher with what the teacher will deem good or great art. Not necessarily what the student thinks is good art.

Go back to the Physics forum so that your superiors can continue to tear apart at your morbidly daft theories.

haha. Look at the mess they call 'string theory'

I was leaning more towards concrete maths and not that inferior, abstract, ad hoc, can't prove it-can't disprove it, crap. :p

Even my bad art teachers were a welcome part of my school day. There an attitude prevailing that anything difficult must be more worthwhile. I think it comes from our Puritan heritage, where anything frivolous or fun must be wicked. I'm sure Duendy would agree. Creating art is as important as science and math. Artists can make a great living, and it's fun. The stereotype of the starving artist is such a myth. I see no argument against art classes, and many for them. I don't think art needs to be justified as a means to something else like "problem solving", or "psychological self-help". Art is it's own justification. To this day, most of the other things I learned were totally worthless.

You say most people won't work with art, but you can't know that if they don't try. My grandfather was an airplane mechanic and test pilot, but discovered sculpture late in life, and welded these cool statues from nut and bolts and machine parts. Art adds an extra dimension to everyone's life, you can do it for money, or as a pastime when you're older. It makes life more worth living. It's empowering, because instead of being a consumer, or a cog in the machine, you are in control, you represent the pinnacle of human achievement.

I agree with Geistkiesel, learning to draw is not that hard with the proper instruction. That same book did wonders for me. When I learned to draw, some of the same kids that made fun of me or set my clothing on fire came up to me and complemented me on my talent. Even this small justification is noteworthy- it is a way for the non-athletic kids to get respect. Being able to draw what you see or think about it is an important skill in any profession, wether you are an architect or industrial designer, a graphic artist or marine biologist.

School should be about giving kids a well-rounded education, not simply preparing them for the job.

What purpose does it serve for the majority of children who will not in any way work with art in its most apparent way?

Even if a student will become a computer programmer, they will have to do some creative thinking to solve interesting problems (I know this because I do both art and programming). Art keeps those creative passageways open.


I have no problem with art classes, except that they are often far too much a class. As a writer, the very phrase "creative writing class" makes me roll my eyes... you can't teach creativity.

I agree with you to a certain extent. I think that art can not be taught but it can be led. I took a creative writing course with one of the best teachers ever. We studied great works of writing. Then he led each person individually into the direction that their wirting needs to take. The creativity come from the individuals, but we were helped along the way to becoming great writers.


Physical activity is 10x more effective at developing those things. If you have a strong and healthy body, creativity forms naturally and kids learn to think for themselves.

It's all about the balance of fitness, creativity and academics.


(many art teachers are complete idiots who've done waaaaaaay too many drugs.)

Join 'em.... you might see things differently.

I have family and frinds who are teachers. Imagine trying to teach art (real art, great art) to a room full of 17-year old who don't give a shit.


A really bad side to art classes is that they are super expensive, and anybody learning art wastes a lot of stuff. Different types of paints are expensive (and wasted a lot by inexperienced students), canvas, paintbrushes (abused by inexperience too)...any quality art supplies are going to cost a bit.

Textbooks are over $60 (at me school, we have some that are $120 or more). If the school wanted to, they could find room in their budget for art. For example, all schools have computers. Digital art would cost nothing.


the art teacher at my school is a total idiot, so i wouldnt know what a proper art class is like

The bad apples ruin everything....



Students should have a more rounded education. Unfortunately, in the first or second year fo high school, you are usually streamed into the science stream or the arts stream. Unfortunately, the intellectually inferior people are also usually streamed into the arts. I believe that students should be taught art and also be taught appreciation. We need more rounded human beings. I this world. Wester society is too skill-focused. Even of someone is not "good" at art, they should be exposed to the great paintings, films, books etc. to keep the pathways open. You never know when they will be useful.

Hmmmm the bell just rang here, I have to go to Mathematics of Data Management class because there is no 4th period art class...

ideal art class ideal art class....hmmmmmmmmmmmworkshops i do is experimental creationing..........goota go. more later

I was leaning more towards concrete maths and not that inferior, abstract, ad hoc, can't prove it-can't disprove it, crap.

I would say the paradoxical, 'can't prove it, can't disprove it' kind of math is superior to what you can prove- 1+1=2. The 'provable' math isn't math at all.

(Incredibly arrogant thing to say when the very inventions you use to comunicate with us are founded on theoretical maths...)

Join 'em.... you might see things differently.

Might. I'll give you that.


to a room full of 17-year old who don't give a shit.

Thats the problem. Learning is something that can happen only when the student is truly motivated and interested in the subject. Which can happen in a classroom, but very rarely.

I would say the paradoxical, 'can't prove it, can't disprove it' kind of math is superior to what you can prove- 1+1=2. The 'provable' math isn't math at all.

(Incredibly arrogant thing to say when the very inventions you use to comunicate with us are founded on theoretical maths...)

Without the concrete, would you have the abstract?

i felt like art classes in public school gave me a place to go where i could identify with other kids and adults. as far as the teaching structure always seemed to go, i mostly hated it. i disagreed then as i do now, with trying to teach people to create art like people in the past have done. if you get into art thru your higher education and are particularly moved by a particular form, period, style, artist, go for it and study it and learn it. but i think if you have a muse of your own, and you're into developing your own vision stay entirely away from other art, artists and the history of art. in my experience being influenced by other artists distracts a person away from themselves. most good artists are known for developing something innovative or otherwise they have mastery over a form or both. a good percentage of them isolated themselves to develop. it doesn't do any good at all to compare your work to others. any kind of thing you are doing artistically can mature into something really significant if you give it time to do so. also it helps to have more than one form or art to practice. i used to hit walls with drawing and poetry. it was horribly frustrating so i took up other things like playing guitar, and sculpting, doing stained glass and pottery, ceramics.. anything to break it up. after a time i started seeing some unity in all the forms...starting seeing the artist, in all my work. overall, persistence in anything will bring progress., with art in my opinion at least yours should be all about you. do it for you and dont let anyone judge what you're doing. some artists find it a need a think to show their art to receive criticism. ii guess thats fine , but i dont get it. i think as long as you think that you need validation from outside yourself you'll never find it. so as for public school art, the idea is nice but its not often as far as im aware is it taught in the right way. its about expression. its about finding freedom in expression. its not about re-creating historical forms, its not just about drawing or painting or messing with clay to make pots. its about whatever turns you on. i know so many people who were turned off probably forever by the way art at an early age was taught to them. sometimes i think im pretty sure id like to teach art someday. i think you can gather by my almost disconnected comments above how i might approach it . shrugs. maybe when im old heh

Really insightful Vissitsarts. i resonate with every word you say
For example where you say people are put OFF creativity. YES!! so true. they are. how many people have i heard say 'icant draw, sing, dance, etc' and their belief in that stops their own unique expression. innate creativity is shared by all

what i do in workshops is use what i call experimental music to free up blocks. what do i mean experimental? its shit i have taped spontaneously....much of i dont know the name of (must get round to that..heh)...it can stratch from 12th century nuns chanting, to Bjork, Tom Waits, Blues, Glass, Indigenous musics, Morrocan Sufi, Jazz....but all compelation.....which i particularly like as it is diverse and can explode you into new dimensions when you are listening and doing art

i am not mad showing people perspective techniques, but if they want, sure. mainly cause i found personally that you can lose some flow when you learn it, and it can be hard to UN-learn.....i love pre-perspective art. though perspecive art CAN be a tool also

i see creativity like a ritual. people are entering a space and plunging into spontaneous experience. something this culture does NOT like. ideally i wold like to pass around sacraments, and then we can really let loose

Painting and sculpture are different from other arts. At least in the minds of many.

In architecture, music, literature and poetry (although not as much now as once in this field) one must have technical ability to create art. Often those who try fail.

Paint or sculpt anything and somebody will call it art.

Painting and sculpture are different from other arts. At least in the minds of many.

In architecture, music, literature and poetry (although not as much now as once in this field) one must have technical ability to create art. Often those who try fail.

Paint or sculpt anything and somebody will call it art.


i dont see that with music. almost anyone can make music just sitting with and instrument and playing with it. i think the notion that one has to study and be technically proficiant and adhere to forms is another concept that prevents many people from feeling free to experiment. architecture , literature and maybe poetry to some extent ill agree with tho. otherwise good art is anything that pleases the artist in my opinion.

i dont see that with music. almost anyone can make music just sitting with and instrument and playing with it. i think the notion that one has to study and be technically proficiant and adhere to forms is another concept that prevents many people from feeling free to experiment. architecture , literature and maybe poetry to some extent ill agree with tho. otherwise good art is anything that pleases the artist in my opinion.
I basically agree, but no musician suffers creativity from learning scales; but listeners suffer music from musicians who haven't doremifasolatido'ed.

geistkiesel

variety is the spice of life, or something like that.

besides without art classes children would get bored with maths and science all day long, same goes for P.E.

The purpose of art class is to teach kids that not everything needs to be purposeful. Not all your efforts should be spent preparing for The Job.

The purpose of art class is to teach kids that not everything needs to be purposeful. Not all your efforts should be spent preparing for The Job.
Au Contraire!
the purpose of art classes is to let kids "see" the world around them in another way. All kids are natural scientists, artists, mathematicians, geniuses; absorbing the world around them; its us adults, family, friends, peers, teachers, neighbors that kill our exploration of the universe around us, by saying things like, "oh, how cute", "its not good enough", "you'll starve" or "art is 'not purposeful'".

art is one of the things that helped humans start using their large brains, without it, we would still be grunting & wearing rough fur clothing, notice cave art:
http://www.sanford-artedventures.com/play/caveart/

Painting and sculpture are different from other arts. At least in the minds of many.not sure why? art is many media, even paper, collage


In architecture, music, literature and poetry (although not as much now as once in this field) one must have technical ability to create art. Often those who try fail.actually, only architecture would qualify or the finished product would fall down ;-)
music, lit & poetry only need ideas to start, then let imagination flow

talent is optional; see most Rap, Pop, or Gothic, Romance, or Poetry slams, etc...


Paint or sculpt anything and somebody will call it art.
actually, Picasso & friends changed all the rules via 'Dada', art is what the artists says it is, or what a person is willing to buy ;-)

Bebelina,

What you are really trying to say is that work that society deems art should be encouraged in school.she may be right


If I felt like doodling and splashing paint over canvas all day, I doubt my teacher would be too pleased. Therefore that rhetoric of it being a method of 'self expression' is bogus, the pressure is on the student to produce what may be considered good art.you missed your calling, I hope you give art another chance
see meaning below:
http://www.artlex.com/ArtLex/a/abstractexpr.html


Besides, mathematics is a better art form than artsy art. Less messy too.math, an other form of art; creative, elegant, insightful, a way to describe the universe by other means
*********2
E=MC
*******

Thank you very much for your both insightful and inspiring comments.

I think what spidergoat said was very liberating in a manner, although everything has its purpose, including art-classes, and of course ART in itself.
The purpose can be to let go of purposes.

Everything can be seen as art, even art-classes in themselves. Next time you visit one, imagine it to be an anthropological theatre, a philosophical film, an interactive intstallation...