The Proposition
Ultimately, the arts and cultural sector makes art for people. Effective art engages us and enables us to think differently about what it means to be human: we learn. Less effective art misses opportunities to engage us, because it is so focused on the product and/or the artist, it forgets the other vital component of the creative cycle – audiences and participants.
So by ring-fencing the learning function (‘education’) into a separate department which works only with small and discrete groups within the total audience and participant base, we keep a crucial part of the creative cycle at arm’s length from the majority of our work, to the detriment of all parties. The methods we use to engage people in art and the ways we choose to maximise opportunities for learning should therefore be absolutely central to our thinking as arts organisations and core to our missions. The processes by which we achieve this should be valued as highly as we value the art and the artist.
A new concept of arts education has to move on from the classic one-way stance of ‘what art can do for people?’ and also ask ‘what can people do for the art?’ Once engaged, how can people inform and enhance the art and the organisation as well as being the cultural receivers? As a result, we have come to define education in relation to arts organisations in a much wider sense than has traditionally been used, replacing education with the more inclusive term 'learning and engagement' as: The process by which people are engaged in the art, and the art and the organisation are informed by people.
What do you think? Join the MMM debate and leave your comments on this blog.
So by ring-fencing the learning function (‘education’) into a separate department which works only with small and discrete groups within the total audience and participant base, we keep a crucial part of the creative cycle at arm’s length from the majority of our work, to the detriment of all parties. The methods we use to engage people in art and the ways we choose to maximise opportunities for learning should therefore be absolutely central to our thinking as arts organisations and core to our missions. The processes by which we achieve this should be valued as highly as we value the art and the artist.
A new concept of arts education has to move on from the classic one-way stance of ‘what art can do for people?’ and also ask ‘what can people do for the art?’ Once engaged, how can people inform and enhance the art and the organisation as well as being the cultural receivers? As a result, we have come to define education in relation to arts organisations in a much wider sense than has traditionally been used, replacing education with the more inclusive term 'learning and engagement' as: The process by which people are engaged in the art, and the art and the organisation are informed by people.
What do you think? Join the MMM debate and leave your comments on this blog.
posted by Mission Models Money at 6:15 pm
1 comments
