>The best art teaching I've seen (and hopefully articipated in) was Lutz >Presser's in Tasmania, and David Askevold's at Nova Scotia; in both cases, >they/we assumed the students were already artists/agents, and treated them >as such. So making art became a cooperative effort - sharing techniques >when needed, but not imposing anything. And believe it or not, everyone >rose to the occasion. It's as if nothing was taught at all but everything >was learned. It was astonishing.
This sits well with me as a pedagogical practice. It makes me think of Ranciere's "Ignorant Schoolmaster." If I am the teacher/explicator with the correct answer, then in order to liberate my students with my wisdom and knowledge, I first have to convince them that they aren't yet liberated. This is a form of oppression masquarading as emancipation. As the situationists say, "Don't liberate me. I'll take care of that." I, as the teacher, don't arbitrate/decide "what matters." But the student still must decide this for herself. That is her own pragmatic question as a practicing artist. Because she has been thrown into the world with a body that can act on things and with a limited amount of time to live. She is the steward of this body and time. So the art work she makes must at least matter to her; otherwise she would spend her time, money, and bodily energy on some other activity she deemed more worthy. What kind of pedagogy best comes alongside my student and helps her discover what matters to her? That becomes my own "pragmatic" question as a practicing teacher. _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
