Category Archives: Academia

Scene in New York

Transparent Studio at Bose Pacia presents work from their current artists in residence, Faranú & Mike Redman, on Thursday night

Transparent Studio at Bose Pacia presents work from their current artists in residence, Faranú & Mike Redman, on Thursday night

This week’s collection of openings, performances, and happenings. (All locations in Manhattan unless otherwise noted.) Continue reading

Leave a comment

Filed under Academia, Art, Art Listings, Gallery, Museum

Arts Education: Worth it or Worthless?

SNAAP-Report

Certainly the value of an arts education must be measured as more than the average earning potential of its graduates. Even so, the SNAAP report findings are inconsistent with data reported in the Kiplinger article, which states that there are higher unemployment rates for arts graduates. Why might this be?

I have a piece on Createquity that analyzes the Strategic National Arts Alumni Project (SNAAP)’s recent findings about arts alumni.

Leave a comment

Filed under Academia, Art, Economy

The Art School as Artwork

The University of Trash: at the Sculpture Center Photo by Graham Coreil-Allen

Read my post on Createquity about art schools as art projects.

Leave a comment

Filed under Academia, Art, Controversial Art, Economy

Artificial Intelligence and the Arts

A painting made by Harold Cohen’s computer program, AARON. Photo by Conall O’Brien

Createquity has published an updated version of my piece on computational creativity.

Leave a comment

Filed under Academia, Art

Capitalism Can Save Art! Down With Capitalism!

It’s difficult to craft a logical response to something as inconsistent and unreasonable as Camille Paglia’s recent Wall Street Journal essay “How Capitalism Can Save Art.” But, when links to the piece ended up in my Facebook feed this week, I knew I had to give it a shot. Paglia concludes that “our fine arts have become a wasteland”due to our country’s shrunken industrial base and the “routine defamation of capitalism by armchair leftists.” Continue reading

Leave a comment

Filed under Academia, Art, Controversial Art, Economy, Politics, Social Implications

Will Computational Creativity Lead to the End of Art?

A Disklavier is a mechanized piano that interprets computer input.

If a computer composes a symphony, should the resulting musical piece be considered a work of art? And how does a computer-generated work affect our perception of human-made works? These are not theoretical questions. A recent article in Pacific Standard highlights Simon Fraser University’s Metacreation project, which aims to investigate computational creativity, in part through the development of “artificially creative musical systems.” Continue reading

Leave a comment

Filed under Academia, Art, Social Implications

Best Value MFAs

Last week, ARTINFO’s Alanna Martinez compiled a list of “The 10 MFA Programs That Give You the Most Bang For Your Buck.” My graduate alma mater, Tyler School of Art, made the list along with Hunter, MIT, and Cal Arts, among others.

Leave a comment

Filed under Academia, Art, Art Listings, Education

In Defense of Online Education

Last Friday, The New York Times published an op-ed by Mark Edmundson titled “The Trouble With Online Education,” in which the UVA professor criticizes many universities’ focus on developing distance learning tools and programs and argues that an online education will always be inferior to a “real” course.

“A real course creates intellectual joy, at least in some. I don’t think an Internet course ever will. Internet learning promises to make intellectual life more sterile and abstract than it already is — and also, for teachers and for students alike, far more lonely.” Continue reading

Leave a comment

Filed under Academia, Art, Education

Brandeis faculty cuts

The Boston Globe just reported that Brandeis plans to cut 2 dozen faculty positions and eliminate a number of academic offerings, including grad programs in anthropology and theater. This, of course, is after Brandeis’ controversial decision to close their Rose Art Museum. Read more about it here.

Leave a comment

Filed under Academia, Art, Museum

We drive the bus, Roberta. Don’t forget it.

In her September 9th column lauding The Bruce High Quality Foundation University, a free, unaccredited art school created by the artist collective The Bruces in the vain of Summerhill and The Art Students League, Roberta Smith criticizes academia’s role in the art world as one that capitalizes on “the illusion that being an artist is a financially viable calling.” She also criticizes the new Ph.D. programs in studio art as “cynical commercial opportunism.” So, is it financially feasible to be an artist? And if not, is the Masters of Fine Arts, presently accepted as the standard terminal degree in artmaking, a useful degree? Would a Ph.D. program benefit artists?

Is “artist” a viable occupation? Smith should hope so; without artists, where would art critics be? As I read Smith’s piece, I was reminded of Gregory Amenoff’s words in Letters to a Young Artist:

Remember that ARTISTS DRIVE THE BUS… The entire enterprise is built on one central event: the creative act in the studio.

Artists generate jobs for art critics, art historians, curators, gallerists, art consultants, arts administrators, and art educators, among others. Thus, it’s odd, even arrogant, for Smith to argue about the feasibility, or lack thereof, of artmaking as a profession. In fact, there are markets for art; it is possible to be an artist, although it’s true that it might not be the most profitable or easiest route for one to take. But these days, what is? Law school, once thought to be a reliable path to a six figure salary, particularly if one went to a top-tier school, is now leaving students six figures in debt with no job prospects. And, those who are lucky enough to score jobs at a Vault 100 firm are stuck working 50-60 hours a week, doing mindless doc review. I may not be able to subsist entirely on my artistic practice, but at least my day job involves creating curriculum, working with leaders in my field on a regular basis, designing material for print and web publication, teaching and writing this blog post in my down time.

And, I am certain that MFA made me a more desirable candidate for my job. A good MFA program prepares its students not just by refining their craft, but also by asking them to relate abstract ideas and visual forms, to utilize available resources, to work under pressure, to work both independently and collaboratively with others, to criticize and evaluate ideas and works, and to effectively communicate, skills that are valuable in myriad settings. Of course, the goal of every artist is to be able to exist entirely off one’s own art, to be a full-time artist, but it doesn’t mean that one has failed if he must instead use the critical thinking and creative skills that he honed in art school to do something else.

Smith is rightly critical of the present model for advanced study in art practice that leaves too many young artists in debt, and struggling to find time to both survive and make art. However, this is not just “the big business of art schools.” This is the higher education system in America, whose costs are rising at a much greater rate than our incomes are. What’s more, she is too dismissive of the possibility of a more, rather than less, rigorous educational model for artists as the solution to this problem. Indeed, I don’t know that a Ph.D. program is really necessary for artists, however, it’s illogical to call the prospect of such a thing “cynical commercial opportunism” on the part of a university that chooses to offer one. In fact, most Ph.D. candidates are funded– that is, they are actually paid (albeit not much) to study their discipline and often also teach undergraduate courses. Assuming this model would hold true for a Ph.D. in fine arts (and it seems to for the University of California San Diego’s new program, one of the only such programs in the United States) this would actually be a good thing for artists. They would have the opportunity to be supported for five years as they made art, and would emerge free with all the connections that a graduate arts education affords, and a degree that would allow them to teach at the college level. Finally, five years of study is a much larger time commitment than the two, or sometimes three years required by MFA programs. Perhaps the greater time commitment will serve to weed out less serious candidates.

Last July, in a performance titled, “Explaining Pictures to a Dead Bull,” the Bruces asked, “How can we imagine a sustainable alternative to professionalized art education?” Maybe the way to combat “the conflation of market, art, and academy” is not to abandon entirely any academic qualification for an artist, as the Bruces propose. Perhaps instead, it is to increase academic qualification, to let academia for once truly embrace the arts, to equate artmaking with original research. And maybe then, Roberta Smith will remember who drives the bus.

1 Comment

Filed under Academia, Art