Note: To protect the privacy of our members, e-mail addresses have been removed from the archived messages. As a result, some links may be broken.
>Seeing all those wonderful works children make, people often get the idea
>that this is real art.
>How pretty, beautiful, fine, esthetical, expressive, technical perfect or
>mature it may look, it is not art.
>At least not in my opinion.
>That asks for explanation.
>It is often said that children yet use the same means and materials which
>artists use, that they picture the same subjects, that they solve the same
>problems and that their work pleases us as the work of artists (sometimes
>even more). This statement however is not correct. It is just the other way
>around. Artists use the same means and materials ...(etc.) which children
>use, which students use at school, which each of us uses, since in daily
>life we use the language of visual images to say what we have to say, to
>show each other what to do, to express our thoughts. The use of visual
>images is very common. We write that language and we read what is written by
>others. Good "art education" is about the use of visual images in the world,
>in cultures, in daily life, in time. This is exactly the best argument for a
>strong place and a continual line for art education at school (although
>there are more arguments).
>Sometimes we call it art what people make, but why? because it meets
>requirements of quality? If that would be the case, would we have an easy
>job? Would it be enough to list those quality arguments and cross them of?
>People tried, but it did not work. Can you tell me what are the qualities of
>a black square? Malevitz painted a black square in 1913 and it is now a
>famous piece of art. However, if you paint a black square it is probably
>not art, unless...
>Unless you are an artist and say that this black square, painted by you, is
>art. Although it is not a very original piece of art, I would agree.
>I propose to call art that what the artist makes and only if he says it is
>art. That solves a lot of problems and saves us so many hours of discussion.
>Does it (in most cases) really matter if a work is art or not? It doesn't.
>What matters is how a visual image affects the mind of the one who sees it.
>In good art education, understanding a visual image (art or not) and
>discussing the influece it has on people are the main goals. The making of
>visual images is to stipulate as a condition for understanding.
>Some children and young people are lucky, they have good art education. It
>is the responsibility of all of us to make this possible for all children.
>I agree, there is another point of discussion now: who is an artist?
>The one who makes a profession out of it.
>If you like his work or not.
>Tel. and fax: (+31) 597 55 15 03