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.

Lesson Plans


Re: the value of certification?

[ Thread ][ Subject ][ Author ][ Date ]
Roseau (mikelr)
Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:29:55 -0500


>The statement that bothered me most is:
>"There are no objective standards for art, anyway"
>
>This attitude is exactly what causes us the most problems in promoting serious
>Art Education in public schools. As long as there are artists and teachers who
>really believe there is no objectivity in Art, that there are no objective
>standards to teach, our problems are guaranteed to continue.
>Reatha

I DO believe there are objective standards, but certification implies that
others agree with my standards (or I with theirs).

After all, the NEA did fund "Piss Christ" and other abominations. I'm sure
that a board of nice people made the decision based upon some set of
standards that they all considered "objective".

I was on the boad of the American Institute of Graph Art and we had a huge
fight over whether designers should be certified. Clearly, it would be nice
for clients to know whether the deigner they hire is "qualified", but alas,
no one could quite come up with what "qualified" meant. A lot of
"qualified" designers were lousy and a lot of "unqualified" designers did
excellent work.

We dropped the idea.

Art is essentially anarchic and should remain so. The mediation of taste
should be left to the culture at large.

cordially

--
Mike Reed

http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/html/art.html