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.
The value of art?
Mon, 05 Oct 1998 20:42:59 -0700
- Next message: PAUL J DILLON: "Architecture grant"
- Previous message: Robert Nickelson: "Re: Picasso"
BluesTruth wrote:
>
> In the inner city, where I teach, one does not teach only the subject of art.
> I find myself teaching them morals, values, ethics, behavior, manners, how
> NOT to get pregnant at 12, the proper way of speaking, how to sit in a seat,
> how to read, etc. You name it-I teach it. Weeks go by and my students
> haven't picked up a crayon.
and RB7Surf7 wrote:
> As for me,I refuse to share
> my experiences in art with vermin of this type, I had a job for one week
> working for the City of New York. I went home for lunch one day and I never
> went back. I'd rather wash dishes than have the dignity of art abused in this
> fashion.
Reading Jill's and RB's comments about their experiences have me wondering why their
school districts even bother to offer art, or anything outside the basics, for that
matter. Do either of you feel you're contributing anything worthwhile to these
students' lives?
We've had a number of philosophical discussions about why art learning is valuable, but
Jill's and RB's students seem not to have gotten the message. What earthly difference
can art make in the lives of kids who have such rotten lives, and short ones at that?
How do we answer the critics who would do away with art in all our schools?
Okay, you newbies, who didn't like the discussions about Birkenstocks and fur, is this a
deep enough topic for you?
Maggie (whose students--not from an inner city but from a reservation--endured an 8-hour
round trip today for a one-hour tour of an exhibit on Egyptian art and thought it most
worthwhile; we're gonna buy adult tickets so we can go again, and take our time)
- Next message: PAUL J DILLON: "Architecture grant"
- Previous message: Robert Nickelson: "Re: Picasso"