why do we teach art history?

I'm still reading through James Elkin's Stories of Art, and in a recent chapter he really challenged me to think about why we use the types of survey texts we do, and to think more about the point of teaching art history survey courses.

Here are some of the questions I wrestled with:

• How does aesthetic education improve people's lives?
• My knee jerk reaction was to think that this question didn't even need to be asked. Obviously, the study of the history of visual art is important...why else would we have museums and preserved architecture and innumerable books on the topic? But that still doesn't answer the question of how aesthetic education improves lives. So I sat with the question for some time, and here are some of my thoughts:
• By studying art history we better appreciate beauty, and we fill some of the fleeting moments of our life with loveliness that is a reward on a psychological and emotional level.
• Through examining the art of the past we are finding ways to compare the art of today to the art of ages long gone, giving us a chance to refine our understanding of beauty in the context of what has come before. 
• When we engage with something we find beautiful, we have a moment that transcends time....we have a kinship, a shared experience in some way with the artist who has the ability to touch something in us. We are given the opportunity to commune with the past, people and civilizations that, in some situations are long gone and far removed.
• By studying the art of the past, we have the opportunity to celebrate human achievement.
• We can be inspired - not just to create art, but to share it, talk about it, think about it, let it move us....to keep it alive.
• Is it possible to teach art history from a fair and unbiased perspective?
• No. How can we? We are human, and we have opinions, especially about the creative arts. Textbooks try their best to remain neutral, but merely through the selection of artworks there is a bias. There is no way to not present art in terms of some being of elevated quality unless the study of art is entirely random, which would lead to an interesting, unconventional, and ultimately implausible course approach....agree? disagree? 
• So, since we cannot be unbiased, should we try? Would it be better to share our appreciation, and sometimes distaste, in a passionate and genuine way to inspire out students to also develop opinions of the art we study? I must admit, I've always bristled at the idea that I should not express my opinions, and have at times shared that some artists and works are my favorites. 
• How should we select artworks for class study?
• In most art survey textbooks we are presented with a sampling of the iconic, cream of the crop works. Is it our job to ensure that students learn factoids they can spout off related to these iconic works, or can we assume they could easily stumble across them on their own? Would it be better to introduce them to little known gems that diverge from the canon of art historical survey slides?

What's your story of art?

I've been reading through James Elkin's Stories of Art, which has prompted me to examine my own view of art history in new ways. Elkin begins by asking readers to draw their own "free and informal map of art history as it appears to you."  He shows some creative maps he and some of his students and colleagues have drawn:

I found these examples interesting as they deviate so much from the typical timelines of art that are so familiar and as they show that we don't personally encounter art in a structured and universal manner.  I was inspired to draw my own story of art.....but please don't judge drawing skills! I'm an art historian, not an artist!

For my "Story of Art" I decided to use the metaphor of a house. I labeled the front stoop as "Western Abstract Art" as that was the first art I can remember as a child. I was drawn to abstract sculpture (especially since a lot of public abstract sculpture doubles as playgrounds for little ones!) and I liked that I felt just as valid in my opinions of abstract paintings as adults since they didn't seem to know what to make of artwork without identifiable objects.

The door to my house, my art comfort zone if you will, has a peephole labeled "Impressionism."  In college, I had a phenomenal instructor, Dr. Anderman, who really challenged me in a few courses related to Impressionism and 19th century European Art. I learned so much from her about how Paris modernized in the 1800s and I loved how Impressionist work gave me an opportunity to travel back in time through their works that so captured their time.  After my peek at Impressionism, I grew fascinated by Modern Art, which opened the door to so many phenomenal and interesting artists that have grown to be some of the most fascinating creative minds I have ever encountered in any discipline.

I spent some time studying Renaissance Art in Florence, where I truly experienced art in a way I never had before. Not only did I begin to more fully understand the impact of the Renaissance of the development of western art, I also came to admire the work of antiquity for its ideals and beauty which have inspired so many.

In recent years, nestled in my little artistic comfort zone, I started to "look out the window" at some of the public art that has emerged in the last decade or so.  I am drawn to their clever approaches to material and content, and appreciate them bringing visual arts to new audiences.

Living in Southern California, I have had the opportunity to venture from home a bit to see some great exhibitions related to work of regional contemporary artists. I particularly enjoy the work of the Light and Space artists of the 1960s, and am continually trying to learn more about artists emerging from the land I love so much!


So, how about you? Have you ever drawn your own "story of art"? I'd love to hear about it!