Frances to William and others... Your observations are insightful and convincing to me. As an extension to this issue of scholarly change in academia it might be interesting to compare the art and design curricula in Russia before and during and after the communist era. Any printed calendars in Russian or their English translations are not yet available to me, but my search for this stuff will continue. PS... The personal identity of individual artists was seemingly not explicitly evident in artworks and artifacts until around the time of the Renaissance when thereafter their autographic signatures were attached to their art, but just exactly what the significance of this fact might be is not clear to me. PS... Any aspect of art can of course justly be deemed an object of science, and most art objects are held as produced relics by social scientists in their study of cultures and societies and polities. This does not mean however that social science itself is an art, except perhaps in some metaphorical sense.
-----Original Message----- From: William Conger [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2010 1:35 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: What if we took this view I don't think it's the case with design as you suggest. Design is generally more collaborative than what you mean by art and it certainly relies on interactive technology. Further, design is aimed more specifically at products and thus any design curricula needs to include a lot more societal groups and interests than the solitary artist in the studio. I think the expanding arenas for artists are fine and aid their roles as image-makers and critics of culture. Although I detest terms like "cultural production" I do understand how they help to identify "post-studio" (the artist out in society and engaged with culture) and more collaborative art and design identities. I am for an inclusive approach. My chief objection to the current directions in art education, and thus aesthetics, is the increasing abandonment of form -- I mean the visuality of form and the history of art as an evolution of form and style -- and the near exclusive concentration on social science as art. This aggrandizes what is called "situational art or aesthetics" which all but erases any interest in the personal identity of the artist as one who embodies or objectifies form as a metaphor or concrete stand-in for human experience. wc ----- Original Message ---- From: Frances Kelly <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Tue, April 13, 2010 8:52:21 PM Subject: RE: What if we took this view The recent messages kindly posted by Saul and William are still being digested by me, but an injected footnote of sorts might be of interest. It may be relevant to consider the relation between "art" and "design" in most academic curricula. Many schools and colleges and universities have entities that they call collectively "art and design" which usually leans toward the visual but away from the architectural. If it is true that such art at least in academia is drifting away from the humanities and philosophy but more toward the technes and sciences, then it seems to me that design is drifting away from logic and theory but more toward craft and skill. My rough scan of design calendars from several noted institutes and departments of design clearly indicate this. Early in the previous twentieth century and up to its last quarter the calendars show there was great emphasis put on such subjects as history and semiotics and empiricism and theory, but not so anymore. The emphasis now seems to be more capitalist and economic and practical. The governments of western industrial nations have also seemingly quit backing facilities like patriotic "design councils" for some political reason unknown to me. My main point is perhaps that art and design are drifting apart in opposite directions, with goals that are vague, and that seem to be unsatisfactory. Perhaps the best thing that is occurring here, if there be one at all, is the merging and blending of art with science and of design with art, but then it is not fully clear just what gap these new polemic dualities might be bridging. --Frances
