In this lecture we looked at types of knowing, the work of James Elkins, and focused on the question 'Can art and design be taught?'.
Covered first was the Higher Education Act introduced in 1991, which joined together universities/polytechnics/colleges to form a collective of 'visual arts'.
The 'noise of different perspectives' was mentioned and questioned as to whether this was a good thing or not.
We looked at James Elkins' book 'Why art cannot be taught', and how Elkins thinks art is an irrational practice. One example used was 'The Crit' as a mode of assessment. Elkins says that the irrationality of crits epitomises the irrationality of art teaching (and artistic practice). Also the crit can be seen as a form of 'psychodrama' - formation and negotiation of tutor opinions - emotionally charged - options - positive mediation - less serious
- silence
- confrontation
Also mentioned was how art can't be taught because it is subjective, nothing rational to be taught. However other views are that art can be taught but few students become outstanding artists - 'great' artists have dropped out. Mediocre art can be taught.
What can be taught?
- Criticism/theory/philosophy
- Visual acuity (Bauhaus)
- Technique -------------------------- art teaching is actually directed towards the reasons that we value art -
complicated questions of expression,
control, self, knowledge, meaning
- how to get along in the world of art
Overall I found this lecture interesting as the question of whether art/design can be taught is something I have actually thought about myself, as I have often considered how some people seem to be naturally creative compared to others and have 'an eye' for design which cannot always be taught as it is almost an innate thing, and although the process of design can be quite logical, the practice of art/creative disciplines, as Elkins says, is quite irrational and subjective - which makes assessing work difficult sometimes because of the subjective element.
