framing the art curriculum || some thoughts on publishing in the field of art education or you...

National Art Education Association

Some Thoughts on Publishing in the Field of Art Education or You Can't Bake a Round Cakein a Square PanAuthor(s): Stuart R. ThompsonSource: Art Education, Vol. 50, No. 3, Framing the Art Curriculum (May, 1997), pp. 56-60Published by: National Art Education AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3193698 .

Accessed: 14/06/2014 21:01

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

National Art Education Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to ArtEducation.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.105 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 21:01:20 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=naea

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3193698?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


...AND NOW, ON V?weuu:E m : wo?uyw.Mamu:u0

SOME THOUGHTS ON PUBLISHING IN THE

You Can't Bake a Round his past summer I spent a month and a half on the : E

Appalachian Trail. As will happen with a hike of that

length, no matter how often you have hiked in the past, you invariably learn much-about yourself, about others, about your place in the greater scheme, . of things. Such, in fact, happened on this trek. Among the many things, I

'

learned this time were that: A;

pine trees are serviceable ; 2 t . [

shelters from hail storms; I * when you are really hungry,

2 ,.

Spam tastes good; s . r

* when you encounter a south- . . bounder, and he/she tells you that *

your immediately upcoming section of the trail is going to be really hard-remember, you've heard it _ ; - . before. .' ' ':

Lately, our profession has been .- making a concerted effort to encourage .

the sharing of writing and research in art education, for example NAEA's Briefing Papers: Creating a Visual Arts Research Agenda Toward the 21st :/_ Century (1996), Implementing a Visual _

Arts Education Research Program: Charting a journey Toward the 21st .

Figure 1. Trail shelter. .. '/

Drawing by S. Thompson 1987.

-

ART EDUCATION / MAY 1997



FIELD OF ART EDUCATION OR

Cak i aSqurePa

Century (1996), Creating a Visual Arts Research Agenda Toward the 21st Century (1993), and in the series Translations: From Theory to Practice. This effort to encourage writing and research in art education, and its publication, is well timed. Those in our field, ranging from novice to widely experienced art teachers, from rural to

urban communities, have much to tell us. Likewise, writers in related fields, as well as those in seemingly unrelated fields, have much to tell us. Most recently, with the July 1996 issue of Art Education, editor Mary Ann Stankiewicz again welcomed manuscripts:

Figure 2. What an Art Teacher Should Know. Acrylic

painting by Alisa Caiarelli, 22, senior Art Therapy

major, 1996.

action research may be especially suited to the mission and goal of Art Education, but all types of manuscripts are welcome as long as they address topics of professional interest to art educators, are clearly written in a straightforward manner, and followthe conventions of professional writing. (p. 4)

These requirements are standard for most professional writing in virtually all fields. Adherence to them signals to the reader that what is being read is "professional" writing. With this paper I would like to rethink openly for our profession particularly, our unerring adherence to such prescription.

At this point, the reader is asked to secure some imaging devices of his or her choice. Crayons or colored felt tip markers are excellent choices.

MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION #1: I read research and commentary in art education, in such publications as

BY STUART R. THOMPSON

MAY 1997 / ART EDUCATION



Figure 3. Tempera painting by 5th grade girl.

Art Education, Studies in Art Education, VisualArts Research, state association- sponsored journals, and other related forums:

a. exhaustively b. as time permits c. "you're kidding?"

We are asked, then, to submit "topics of professional interest to art educators." Such a requirement would seem reasonable. Yet, without being sophomoric, one could ask the question, "might we find significant connections between visual image production and appreciation and virtually the full scope of the human condition?" For example, in a recent issue of VisualArts Research (1996), Harold McWhinnie involves us in a discussion of "chaos and the fractal," as such ideas might affect art education. With this as an example, would it be useful to bound the scope of materials submitted for publication? Otherwise, we might err on the side of over- inclusivity (if that is at all possible), rather than to err on the side of unnecessary exclusivity. What, after all, must an art teacher know?

Secondly, we are asked to submit material that is "clearly written in a straightforward manner." Here, most critically, I believe our profession needs to rethink this seemingly reasonable requirement, a requirement, again, universally incumbent upon all professional writing. To draw an analogy, we might say that Andrew Wyeth or Edward Hopper or Richard Estes or Mary Cassatt present their material in a clear and straightforward manner. That is, we have no difficulty deciphering the dog lying in the field

0

4b6 I

S.

I" 1

grass; we "understand" the night people at the diner counter; we, in fact, have ridden the chrome-shiny escalator; we can almost feel ourselves slouched in the chair as is the young girl. How clear and straightforward, on the other hand, is the material presented by such artists as Arshile Gorky, Patti Warashina, or many of the other postmodernists? Do we reject these latter artists because they are not immediately "clear" and "straightforward," in the manner of the former group, or do we adjust to the presentations of these latter artists, an activity that usually requires more time and certainly more effort on our part? Can ideas in art education be presented in other than the left-brain, very predictably organized fashion we have grown up with? Must we rule out as presentational formats,

* intentional ambiguity; * determined analogy; * story telling ('The New Art

Education and What We've Learned from Superwoman" [Mims & Lankford, 1994], as an example, moves in this direction);

* myth;

* predominently visual sequencing (e.g., the comic book approach);

* intentional paradox, or seeming un- relatedness;

* reader-as-participant (e.g., cut and rearrange; sentence completion; perhaps something on the order of things-to-do restaurant place mats);

* process viewing (e.g., follow the author as she "webs" a concept)?

Proactively stated, we could present ideas as would an impressionist Or an ex- pressionist. Or as a surrealist. That material would become as useful and "clear," over time, as is that of the realist.

We teach, in the visual arts, that nega- tive space is as important and full of information as positive space.

MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION #2: I believe that there are multiple learning styles, from concrete to abstract, from active to reflective and that there are multiple intelligences, for example, those envisioned by Howard Gardner (1983). Moreover, truly believing the above, I make allowances in my teaching for various learning predispositions:

a. scrupulously.




b. as teaching conditions permit/warrant

c. Who's Gardner?

Finally, we are asked, as is all of academia, to "follow conventions for professional writing." Beyond giving proper credit for the work of others, whether visual or verbal, why must we, in every instance, follow conventions for professional writing when much of our material and some of our fundamental thought processes are vastly different from much of the rest of academia? Differently stated, how much does an imposed format shape and alter the material being presented? Picasso's Guernica measures 138 x 308" (Selz, 1981, p. 331). Had Picasso presented this work to the viewer in an 8 x 18" format, its psychological and sociopolitical impact would have been far less. It would seem reasonable that, to be most effective, a given body of material must attain its own format.

Can Figure 4. Pennsylvania Route 45. Oil painting

by S. Thompson, 1976

hugely different statements and ideas always be boxed in the same container? Should we have insisted that Andy Warhol present his material in an impressionistic style? Perhaps we should have demanded that Georgia O'Keeffe depict for us a flower as Watteau might have.

In other words, how much is it incumbent upon a professional journal and in particular upon an art education journal, to adapt, to the offerings from the field? Equally important, how incumbent is it upon the field to see innovative ways of sharing ideas in a professional journal and to submit such alternate offerings to their journal? We want our profession to share ideas: ideas come in more than rigidly discursive or overwhelmingly linguistic form.Consider, for example, a specific three-mile stretch of central Pennsylvania highway, experienced over a decade apart by two individuals, neither, at the time of their respective viewing, knowing the other. The first viewer (in 1976) responds with a somewhat abstracted visual image of

the remote, summer heat stillness of the setting; the second viewer (in 1989) responds with the imagery of language. In 1993 one respondent sees the abstract painting of the other and comments, "you know, for some reason I think I've been there." Then the painter tells the writer (a philosopher, as it happens) the exact location of the image and the writer produces a poem earlier spawned by the same three-mile stretch of road:

The Longing Do we ever drive to our destination? Do we ever get there? It moves as we do, Always away. Just as, heedless of the

speed, Our moon keeps up. We follow

directions sure. The signs we long to read grow

smoothly to view. Yet names belie themselves. And we,

shadows of Future selves, shift about sensing

something's wrong: Our destiny withdraws, drawing with it

us, Pointedly-never getting, but forgetting; Leaving unseized moments and the

disastrous Seized ones, too-in what sharp relief

they call to mind What keeps us on our way, Dame

Mnemosyne? (Lachenman, 1989)

Now take your marking tools and randomly scribble over some of these pages. You've wanted to do this since you were admonished in elementary school not to mark the pages of your text- books.

Art education claims for itself many things: it claims to address multiple learning styles and intelligences; it claims to be well suited to address multicultural sensi- tivities; it claims to be peculiarly integra- tive; it suggests that it encourages the

MAY 1997 / ART EDUCATION



learner to learn thinking skills, such as critical and creative thinking, and prob- lem solving. It touts its interactive nature and perhaps most significantly, it claims to involve the learner in risk-taking be- havior. These are all profound and valid claims. If this be so, perhaps some of our publications need to more clearly demonstrate, by their appearance, such distinc- tions. Given that these claims are, in fact, operative in the classroom, we should see- not simply read about, but see and read- them made manifest in our public offerings. We might want to make more clearly visible to our many publics, as well as to ourselves, such things as keen awareness of multiple learning styles and risk-taking. This is how we differ sub- stantially from other disciplines.

Are we attempting to be like other "real" academic disciplines, at times too much so or inappropriately ? So much so, that we strive to emulate their professional ways of idea sharing, their talk? This does not in any way negate the power of and the need to employ linguistic modes of idea sharing-we are language-dependent animals. Moreover, some material is, in fact, transmitted via a determinedly discursive fashion: this is where a vehicle such as Studies in Art Education becomes most appropriate. For any number of reasons, however, most members of our profession will peruse Art Education as opposed to Studies. It is here that our idea sharing needs to find its widest range of expression; the

journal's format should be unabashedly risk-taking-diversity itself. Both those within the profession and those outside need to see this. An entire issue, for example, could be a collection of highly participational articles. An entire issue could consist of visual material only. Again, this could happen only if practitioners-elementary, secondary,

museum, higher education-provide the material.

MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION #3: Having read this article:

a. I agree with everything stated and will commence to submit four or five manuscripts (wide sense of the term) a year for consideration for publication

b. I note that, while espousing diverse idea-sharing formats, this article itself remains heavily linguistic, like all the rest

c. "the way we've always published was good enough for my teachers, so it's good enough for me."

So, okay, this paper is heavily linguistic. Still, the intent was to openly rethink how we talk to each other. Our profession now and for a long time has had excellent publications. One of our excellent periodicals, it is suggested, needs to demonstrate the uniqueness of the discipline.

Eighteen miles later, you and your hiking partner throw down your packs, grab your water bottles, a Snickers, prop yourselves against a tree, and commence to rehydrate, refuel, and reflect. Yeah, the southbounder did say that this would be a particularly tough stretch of trail. Still, several mountains, a passing rainstorm, and a peanut butter and cheese lunch later you think, "didn't come free, but, hey, it wasn't that bad. If we want different scenery we have to pay for it." There is wisdom where you wish to find it and it may or may not lie in a can of Spam.

Finally, let's indulge our sometimes evaluative role as teachers by "scoring" the three multiple choice questions. There can be several interpretations:

1. If you answered all three questions with "a" you probably

need to get out a bit more. 2. If you answered all three

questions with "c" you're probably having too much fun, or perhaps need to reconsider your choice of career.

3. Any other combination of answers may be interpreted as the reader may wishes.

Stuart R. Thompson is Professor ofArt & Education at Seton Hill College in Greensburg, Pennsylvania.

REFERENCES Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The

theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.

Lachenman, D. (1989). The Longing. Unpublished poem.

McWhinnie, H. (1986). Chaos and the fractal. Visual Arts Research, 22 (1), 90-96.

Mims, S. K & Lankford, E. L (1994). The new art education and what we've learned from superwoman. Art Education, 47 (3), 57-61.

NAEA Commission on Research in Art Education. (1993). Creating a visual arts research agenda toward the 21st century. Reston, VA: National Art Education Association.

NAEA Commission on Research in Art Education. (1996). Briefing papers: Creating a visual arts research agenda toward the 21st century. Reston, VA: Author. National Art Education Association.

National Art Education Association. (1996). Implementing a visual arts education research program: Charting a journey toward the 21st century. Reston, VA.

Translations: From theory to practice. (series). Reston, VA: National Art Education Association.

Selz, P. (1981). Art in our times. New York: Harry Abrams.

Stankiewicz, M. A. (1996). Editorial: Tradition and innovation-Time out of context. Art Education, 49 (4), 4-5.




framing the art curriculum || some thoughts on publishing in the field of art education or you...

Documents