IN THIS DEBATE:

The Question

Responses

Join the Debate





Justin Ions, Student of Architecture, Leeds Metropolitan Univ., England
Date submitted: 1/6/99

Here's a two minute analysis of the situation....The understanding of aesthetics is a form of complex system, and complexity is by nature irreducible to a simpler form...(this would make it merely complicated). My point is, that if artistic form is inherently complex, can it reasonably be taught in a short space of time? What can be taught is a starting point to an understanding which requires a lifetime, and therefore a teacher can only provide a starting point.

The problem with this is that the starting point is open to the personal whim of the teacher or course, and could then cause a flawed or one-sided and shallow exploration of the art.

'Art' might be seen historically as the coming together in varying proportion of spiritual expression and craftsmanship or technique. Technique and craftsmanship have finite qualities which can be taught and appreciated...However spiritual understanding is a lifetime's experience.

My feeling is that arts should be taught with an emphasis on describing the widest possible range of spiritual and emotional understanding, craftsmanship is essential but secondary--it is the individual who will then combine these elements to create the work of art...at any level.

Previous response || Next response