The "You Said It" Department
jen besemer - gorgeous hybrids and recombinant poetry
RSS

Recent Posts

Seeing Double: Two Kinds of Double-Exposures with Polaroid Cameras
Polaroid Spectra shots using Impossible Project films
Big Bang: New Studio Visit
My Treat
EmergencyINDEX is out!

Most Popular Posts

Poet Crush: Geof Huth
more sun stuff: advanced solar printing
Meet the new site--not the same as the old site!
Walter Hamady's work at Corbett vs. Dempsey
A Studio Visit

Categories

"silicone" vs. "silicon"
alternative markets
art education
art for you to do
art history
art market
art practice: issues and challenges
art/activism
audio
calls for work
chicago artists, chicago galleries, art practice, art marketing
collage
colleagues and collaborators
community-supported arts
criticism
crowdsourcing arts funding
double exposure
experiments
getting involved
history of literature
Impossible Project
jen besemer, david london
Modernism
packfilm
painting
performance
photo transfers
photography
poetics
poetry
poetry market
Polaroid Big Swinger
Polaroid Spectra
portrait
press
process notes
publications
reviews of jen besemer
self-portrait
shows
studio visit
upcoming events
video poems
visual poetry
words
works in progress

Archives

May 2012
April 2012
February 2012
January 2012
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011

powered by

News and Notes

The "You Said It" Department

I subscribe to BOMB Magazine, and in the current issue (Number 118, Winter 2012) I found something good in an interview with artist John Miller.  He makes some very articulate observations on contemporary circumstances surrounding the profession of artist, and the educational approach that (sometimes) prepares people for that profession. Here's the part of the interview that best resonates for me:

The fundamental problem with being an artist is trying to figure out how to use your time and what to do with yourself.  In that, it differs significantly from other vocations.  And that's the quality that is being lost in our art schools and in schools in general; there's no more floundering around.  If everything has to be optimized at every stage, that's a real loss: another fine day in fine-arts education!  That could be linked to neoliberal economics--students are paying more for tuition, they want to see results, they evaluate their teachers, and so on [pp.54-5].

This actually lays out a lot of ideas I've been trying to synthesize and express for myself for the last year or so, and I find it very validating both as a (now) full-time artist and as a former college educator.  I should also say that, as an educator, I had no problem with the idea of students evaluating their teachers. But I do feel that increasingly, all forms of education are, (as Miller suggests) under the thumb of business models and "optimization"-driven assessment procedures. In my own situation, the push toward the student-as-customer ethos created a toxic and untenable environment wherein I felt absolutely disempowered and utterly demoralized.  Students expected of me (and my discipline) things that were impossible to give, at times even unreasonable and inhuman to ask.  The overall campus cultures tended to isolate low-power faculty (of which I was most definitely one).  Others, of course, have had more positive experiences with teaching at a college or university level. But even they can provide an incisive critique of the influence of corporate models on the conduct and ethos of higher ed.

For an audio recording of part of the John Miller interview, go here.



0 Comments to The "You Said It" Department:

Comments RSS

Add a Comment

Your Name:
Email Address: (Required)
Website:
Comment:
Make your text bigger, bold, italic and more with HTML tags. We'll show you how.
Post Comment
Website provided by  Vistaprint
Website
provided by Vistaprint