Yet another in the stream of continuum of applications, proposals and submissions made over the last few years. Once or twice I get through.
Am also involved in a strange application process as visiting lecturer for a new venture - the London School of Liberal Arts libartslondon . It is an online blogging debate. The process is unusual in that we did not submit CVs and the usual form, but had to write a statement outlining our experience and suitability to teach a broad-based liberal arts subject. The forum is by invite and sets up themes - I have started a thread about The Canon and contributed to others. It is all a bit mystifying - as one blogger pointed out, there is no real school as yet, no staff, no curriculum, and they are asking applicants to contribute and shape the entire course. That is true, but still I feel drawn. I am also finding the relentless intellectualism of most posters really offputing - trading references and dry concepts. however, when I have dared to mention this, I've had a positive response, which makes me think that there may be something there for me after all.
Here are some of my blogs - alot of writing, but it has been a chance for me to explore some of my ideas about art in a wider context, and which ideas I am also resistant to.
- I think what is fascinating is works in the arts which "make it" into the canon and become what we all know. Fashion, politics, waves of aesthetic aside, there are always significant masterpieces which slip through, or move in and out of favour.
Above all, this attitude of what is seen as established culture today, set in stone, written in anthologies, documented in books, museums and websites, is surely as shifting as it has ever been, and it is truly valuable to develop a critical way of thinking which rigourously analyses what is shown today, and in what context and assumptions.
It seems easier to analyse choices of the past, to see establishment through empire or colonialism or social influences, but what of today, what of tomorrow.
What is this white cube way of showing art anyway.
Above all, this attitude of what is seen as established culture today, set in stone, written in anthologies, documented in books, museums and websites, is surely as shifting as it has ever been, and it is truly valuable to develop a critical way of thinking which rigourously analyses what is shown today, and in what context and assumptions.
It seems easier to analyse choices of the past, to see establishment through empire or colonialism or social influences, but what of today, what of tomorrow.
What is this white cube way of showing art anyway.
- I think it's the common cultural references which is interesting and apasite. When talking amongst artists, teachers, peers, we must have a common language, or at least be on the same page. And yet in the creative arts, we are looking to be surprised and to find things we didn't know before.
I like the idea of a personal canon (of course we all do that in a way) but it may miss out something we "ought" to know. Puts me in mind of the very first Sherlock Holmes story where he didn't know the earth rotated around the sun, but had stuck with an earlier version of knowledge because such an area of truth was irrelevant to his current studies. Although Conan Doyle allowed his character to evolve, I though it was a fascinating idea about only knowing what you need to know in your field. We would surely hope for a broader spectrum of knowledge, but we, and by we I mean I, sometimes forget how specialised one's thinking becomes within one's own speciality.
I like the idea of a personal canon (of course we all do that in a way) but it may miss out something we "ought" to know. Puts me in mind of the very first Sherlock Holmes story where he didn't know the earth rotated around the sun, but had stuck with an earlier version of knowledge because such an area of truth was irrelevant to his current studies. Although Conan Doyle allowed his character to evolve, I though it was a fascinating idea about only knowing what you need to know in your field. We would surely hope for a broader spectrum of knowledge, but we, and by we I mean I, sometimes forget how specialised one's thinking becomes within one's own speciality.
- You could hardly pick a richer theme and arena than London. I think visits in situe to various corporate and public artworks in the city would fit in with a multilayered approach. There are many statements of empire, and of more contemporary aspirations, comments and memorials. Banking atriums still sponsor large scale art which can be visited by the public by appointment. Also looking at architecture is fascinating in this context
- I think for creative writing, completing stories, poems, articles,etc, in a different media would be effective - painting a novel, making an animation, making a biographical scultpure...Always talking of one art in terms of another is effective, and working cross media even more so.
- I think one can have great revelations working cross media - seems to me what Liberal Arts is about. Besides, people learn all the more when they are engaged in enjoyable occupations - no learning need be dry. Personally I trained as a classical musician before becoming a visual artist, and feel the benefit of having resource to many terms of reference and experience.
I love the thought of a creative writing course discovering new forms of narrative through animation, exploring character through portraiture, describing their creative process in drawing. It's a very rich seam.
I love the thought of a creative writing course discovering new forms of narrative through animation, exploring character through portraiture, describing their creative process in drawing. It's a very rich seam.
- I admit I have been struggling with the definition of liberal arts, and still am after reading through much of the blogs. I think it all depends very much where one is coming from.
If liberal arts is about fostering an analytical and critical approach across disciplines, and providing a broad cultural context, then everything need not come from a purely intellectual context. I'm sticking my neck out here, but I thought I was invited to participate in this forum as an arts practitioner. I have a reflective practice and a background and education across media and am also involved in critique, but I admit I'm finding it difficult to engage in much of these conversations. Maybe this is not for me, but I was expecting more practitioners, writers, actors, artists, etc, more interplay between experiencial ideas and less endless references.
I find myself thinking much more about the point at which prospective students will be at, and how to engage them. I understand that many will have the end view in sight, but I am hoping to trully colaberate in ideas.
There has been talk of leading students to anger to provoke response. Perhaps tutors also can be provoked.
If liberal arts is about fostering an analytical and critical approach across disciplines, and providing a broad cultural context, then everything need not come from a purely intellectual context. I'm sticking my neck out here, but I thought I was invited to participate in this forum as an arts practitioner. I have a reflective practice and a background and education across media and am also involved in critique, but I admit I'm finding it difficult to engage in much of these conversations. Maybe this is not for me, but I was expecting more practitioners, writers, actors, artists, etc, more interplay between experiencial ideas and less endless references.
I find myself thinking much more about the point at which prospective students will be at, and how to engage them. I understand that many will have the end view in sight, but I am hoping to trully colaberate in ideas.
There has been talk of leading students to anger to provoke response. Perhaps tutors also can be provoked.
- My thought on the liberal arts venture is that once one has studied deeply and deconstructed or constructed something, anything, the value in applying those analytical and critical skills to another media is intensified. I like the talk there has been on here of writers sculpting and so on.
As an artist I have had fascinating colaberative talks with scientists - almost the opposite end of the spectrum (since artists prove knowledge to themselves). Is this what is meant by liberal arts? That one form of specialism can communicate with another without always using the same specialised language? I hope so.
There are philosophical elements studied within fine art, and most areas refer to other disciplines. The liberal arts could develop a broad and common language, cultured but not too specialised, rich in reference and experience.
As an artist I have had fascinating colaberative talks with scientists - almost the opposite end of the spectrum (since artists prove knowledge to themselves). Is this what is meant by liberal arts? That one form of specialism can communicate with another without always using the same specialised language? I hope so.
There are philosophical elements studied within fine art, and most areas refer to other disciplines. The liberal arts could develop a broad and common language, cultured but not too specialised, rich in reference and experience.
- Although the truth is that we all come from some point of view or another, we do not do so exclusively. We all cross media and specialisms to a certain extent, and the pursuit of liberal arts is surely to encourage a breadth of understanding.
Frankly, I don't want to have pretend that I have read this philosopher or that book. That doesn't tell me where a person is coming from, other than that it is an intellectual, highly specialised base. In this arena should we all not be able to speak clearly and in an informed manner about concepts without relying on whether we have all read the same books or understand exactly the same references. If we are all educated people in the humanities, or science, or whatever our specialism, I hope to be able to have a meaningful and productive conversation without having to rely on exactly the same language.
Would we not hope of our prospective students that they could talk to anyone in the broad field of liberal arts in a productive way, having shared terms of reference to an extent, but an attitude of openness above all else.
This surely means tackling the same theme from many different perspectives, as many different facets as can be brought together, for example, if it is the theme of history - London and the Wealth of Nations: 1688-1901
or Life Fiction - Helping People Dramatise their Lives,
or any of the interesting threads being discussed, then the same subject will be presented to students by a philosopher, by a scientist, by an artist, a writer, an actor, a historian, a musician, and so on, so that the students the will form their own language and understandings through these multifarious event.
The liberal arts arena opens up and facilitates this birth of new ideas, beyond itself, and beyond each specialism.
Frankly, I don't want to have pretend that I have read this philosopher or that book. That doesn't tell me where a person is coming from, other than that it is an intellectual, highly specialised base. In this arena should we all not be able to speak clearly and in an informed manner about concepts without relying on whether we have all read the same books or understand exactly the same references. If we are all educated people in the humanities, or science, or whatever our specialism, I hope to be able to have a meaningful and productive conversation without having to rely on exactly the same language.
Would we not hope of our prospective students that they could talk to anyone in the broad field of liberal arts in a productive way, having shared terms of reference to an extent, but an attitude of openness above all else.
This surely means tackling the same theme from many different perspectives, as many different facets as can be brought together, for example, if it is the theme of history - London and the Wealth of Nations: 1688-1901
or Life Fiction - Helping People Dramatise their Lives,
or any of the interesting threads being discussed, then the same subject will be presented to students by a philosopher, by a scientist, by an artist, a writer, an actor, a historian, a musician, and so on, so that the students the will form their own language and understandings through these multifarious event.
The liberal arts arena opens up and facilitates this birth of new ideas, beyond itself, and beyond each specialism.
I'm sure I agree with that. I think I just find it frustrating when one feels excluded from ideas and conversations because of in-jargon or specialised language. In life, outside this forum I mean, I'm sure we all have great experiences of sharing across media and disciplines.
I find the whole liberal arts idea one in itself really worth considering. I'm sure students of the school, and tutors, will be asked many times over the years just what is meant by the term liberal arts, and will have to come up with pithy definitions. For myself, that is where the key lies.
In fine art the nub of the debate is often about what is art, and does this particular thing qualify as art.
And so I really do wonder, what are the liberal arts?
It seems to be the study and critique of a very wide range of disciplines, and certainly not a completely intellectual pursuit. Practical humanities, perspectives of theories, mulitdisciplinary insight.
I have googled liberal arts a bit, and had a fascinating mix of definitions, suggesting a more renaissance education and a true general knowledge.
I find the whole liberal arts idea one in itself really worth considering. I'm sure students of the school, and tutors, will be asked many times over the years just what is meant by the term liberal arts, and will have to come up with pithy definitions. For myself, that is where the key lies.
In fine art the nub of the debate is often about what is art, and does this particular thing qualify as art.
And so I really do wonder, what are the liberal arts?
It seems to be the study and critique of a very wide range of disciplines, and certainly not a completely intellectual pursuit. Practical humanities, perspectives of theories, mulitdisciplinary insight.
I have googled liberal arts a bit, and had a fascinating mix of definitions, suggesting a more renaissance education and a true general knowledge.
- Perhaps the canon is more analogous to a thinking breathing being. One can untangle endless threads as to why it exists as it is, who decides, and why some works never quite make it into the collective consciousness. It's not that it should be other than what it is, it just is, always changing, always a bit out of step with what it really should be, all things being equal.
I have a lovely old victorian book about concert favourites - some are still in the reportoire, and some are forgotten. I also have a lovely edwardian set of encyclopaedias. full of fascinating and out of date information. Somehow by seeing the inadequacies of past world views (to our eyes) we gain insight into how fleeting and transitory our own world view is, and how reflective our current canon is to our way of thinking.
There is no wrong view of the world - they're all wrong.
I have a lovely old victorian book about concert favourites - some are still in the reportoire, and some are forgotten. I also have a lovely edwardian set of encyclopaedias. full of fascinating and out of date information. Somehow by seeing the inadequacies of past world views (to our eyes) we gain insight into how fleeting and transitory our own world view is, and how reflective our current canon is to our way of thinking.
There is no wrong view of the world - they're all wrong.
- Identity is a classic arts project, and I'm sure one which encompasses many disciplines. There are so many approaches possible, so many activities and studies, reading and activation. It brings in cultural and contemporary issues, political and artistic concerns. In fact, you could throw anything at it and devise a liberal arts context. I can't make any sensible suggestions yet, because I am only thinking of rather naughty ones where the students create false identity cards to gain access to the house of commons or something like that - point made, but rather costly. However, with a liberal arts actor/tutor, they could spend a day in a different identity, constructing and inhabiting other personae...
- Having had a reread through posts, my thinking is that open subjects have much more scope for development by all than specific, for example, everyone can hang their hat upon "Identity" or "London and the wealth of nations" or perhaps "Just what are the liberal arts anyway?"
Although any course must be multilayered and highly developed, let's be inclusive at this stage, in the spirit of the liberal arts, and incorporate all disciplines. A rather open topic can bring in all sorts of intellectuals and practitioners, providing many aspects and a wide experience for the student.
Although any course must be multilayered and highly developed, let's be inclusive at this stage, in the spirit of the liberal arts, and incorporate all disciplines. A rather open topic can bring in all sorts of intellectuals and practitioners, providing many aspects and a wide experience for the student.
- I think with the rapid evolution of photography and moving image technologies, process will become less of an issue. The fundamental elements of photography as an art also move on with technology, with new forms of imaging possible, eg, speed, magnification and manipulation. However, aspects of composition, subject matter and intention remain as the main point of art photography. Across all arts, artists tend to use multi media more than before, morphing all sorts of techniques. As long as new technologies remain tools for artists, increasing the palatte of choices, all media remain valid. When instant digital images are even more ubiquitous, time rich print and photography become more valued. |
The onus remains with the artist to prove their photography is art, to become more expert, perhaps more specialised, to diferrentiate their work from the mass of snaps available.
In many fields it is similar - there is a proliferation of printed and digital images and written material.
If it focusses and improves the quality of the very best, then it can be a virtuous cycle.
The medium is a chosen means to an end.
In many fields it is similar - there is a proliferation of printed and digital images and written material.
If it focusses and improves the quality of the very best, then it can be a virtuous cycle.
The medium is a chosen means to an end.
- I agree that the skills change - artists still use oil paints, as well as acrylics through to multi media.
I think that the young photography student who may never has stepped into a darkroom will approach photography differently from those of us who have, but I don't think their skills or sensibilities are necessarily diluted amongst the mass of proliferation. I think artists use the tools of their time, and will evolve their skills accordingly.
I agree it is changing. One need not always be on the cutting edge of technology to be contemporary.
I think that the young photography student who may never has stepped into a darkroom will approach photography differently from those of us who have, but I don't think their skills or sensibilities are necessarily diluted amongst the mass of proliferation. I think artists use the tools of their time, and will evolve their skills accordingly.
I agree it is changing. One need not always be on the cutting edge of technology to be contemporary.
- I also love the idea of a set of criteria qualifying entry into the Canon. It's such a bizarre, self- reflecting notion, which would also be illuminating. We may end up with terrible nonsense which would qualify by points - perhaps some do already.
But somehow by picking out qualifying qualities and rules, one would uncover paradigms.
Again, it is easier to see through the paradigms, and analyse the choices of the past, through what has faded from the Canon. Oh, for the awareness too see our own age so. Those early 21st century Londoners, how could they think like that? How could they value those fleeting pursuits and deny the self evident truth?
Perhaps the project should be to project into an imagined future and reload the Canon for then. I don't mean in a sci-fi way, but in a progressive leap, projecting human nature into imagined circumstances.
But somehow by picking out qualifying qualities and rules, one would uncover paradigms.
Again, it is easier to see through the paradigms, and analyse the choices of the past, through what has faded from the Canon. Oh, for the awareness too see our own age so. Those early 21st century Londoners, how could they think like that? How could they value those fleeting pursuits and deny the self evident truth?
Perhaps the project should be to project into an imagined future and reload the Canon for then. I don't mean in a sci-fi way, but in a progressive leap, projecting human nature into imagined circumstances.
- I don't have the same prejudice about the word creative when associated with writing. In this forum all sorts of terms are being cited, writers, references, schools of knowledge, specific philosophies.
Let's not lose the word or idea of creativity. If it has poor associations, then let's reframe them.
Creative writing, fine art, the liberal arts - they all have associations good and bad, and manifest through new definitions.
People know what you mean by creative writing.
Let's not lose the word or idea of creativity. If it has poor associations, then let's reframe them.
Creative writing, fine art, the liberal arts - they all have associations good and bad, and manifest through new definitions.
People know what you mean by creative writing.
No comments:
Post a Comment