For a visual subject, when it comes to its defense, we don’t half talk a lot!
I’ve been considering this for the week, and it just doesn’t make sense to me! Why on earth aren’t we using what we are best at? Why not bombard the government with a visual defense – show them and the public the benefits of art – with art?
There appears to be a huge reticence in the teaching profession to place oneself in the spotlight and stand up for what we believe in. Is this the difference between the artist and the teacher I wonder? Artists don’t appear to have much difficulty in sharing their opinions. I would describe my formative work as “political”. My intention as an artist has always been to make a statement. But teachers appear far more demur. Is this because we aren’t supposed to have opinions? That we have to present a balance at all times to represent all sides fairly?
Education starts in the galleries, looking at exemplars. I love that term; Exemplary!.. Worthy of imitation… there’s the key word… WORTHY…
…Are we?
There is huge irony in the notion that we create visual stimuli as statements, yet academia needs explanations to validate it. It mirrors what is happening in the press and government at present. The world looks the way it does because of artists. The clothes we wear, the cars we drive, the buildings we work and live in, furniture, decorations… the list goes on and on ad infinitum… anything man made; created by an artist or designer; in essence, started as a drawing. Yet we need to safeguard our position in words.
Isn’t it obvious?
Yet I’m tempted to refer back to my previous blog and assert the notion that alternative expression and vision take precedence to that initial drawing. Do you have to be a great draughtsman to develop an innovative concept? Academia and examination suggests so… deconstruct your idea and gain acceptability.
This is beginning to read like I have an issue with the institution. I merely suggest that they are culpable also and have a responsibility to aid the cause of the Arts by championing the work rather than seeking to continually critique it, or with oration.
To be worthy we have to show we are transparent – show what we are doing. Hidden away in our cozy classrooms we have little chance of convincing a general public that has forgotten its own instruction, the rewards that art contributes. We need to personalize it once again and involve and remind them of their time with us. Even the politicians partook in our lessons. We need to form partnerships and move to a more central ground partnering “high” art with functionality giving the work purpose and presence. The banks in Germany collect art to enhance the workspace; it becomes a part of the building and workforce. By establishing links with business, seeking to place work in environments, giving purpose to the work, surely we have a far better chance of defeating the proposals that are being forced upon us. Jude Law spoke of cultural vandalism in his Turner prize speech last night. Lets change that to educational revolution with art spearheading the assault…
