art in general education: an historical review with contemporary implications

National Art Education Association

Art in General Education: An Historical Review with Contemporary ImplicationsAuthor(s): Guy HubbardSource: Art Education, Vol. 19, No. 1 (Jan., 1966), pp. 10-13Published by: National Art Education AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3190758 .

Accessed: 15/06/2014 15:08

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

National Art Education Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to ArtEducation.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.203 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 15:08:52 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=naea

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3190758?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


GUY HUBBARD

ART EDUCATORS ARE DEVOTED to the goals of general education more than to the production of artists and yet our knowledge of the antecedents of this education task are not commonly known. The events of the nineteenth century are well provided for in the published work of Frederick Logan1 and in several unpublished dissertations of recent years.2 The purpose of this essay, however, is briefly to place those events that preceded public school art education in the United States in historical perspec- tive. This essay will span approximately two thousand years, from Hellenic Greece to the late eighteenth century and then jump, somewhat unceremoniously, to the twentieth century. Art Education in Greece: Hellenic Greece was governed by artists and soldiers. The ruling groups were the warriors in war time and in less hazardous times sought to balance physical powers with "music." The expression, "music" may mislead us because of our present day usage but it would seem then to have suggested poetry, singing, and possibly instrumental accompaniment.3 The advent of the Sophists and the subsequent loss of Greek independ- ence to the Macedonians challenged this tradition. The intellectual leaders of the times concluded that the only solution lay through a clear statement of their cultural goals-with "the formation of the human soul."4

The purpose of education as a whole in Greece seems relatively clear but that of art education within this framework is less well defined.5 Plato wrote that art should contribute to the development of character. Critics at public functions should, he thought, seek to raise the level of taste toward a final ideal standard.6 Through their work artists should also guide people from childhood onward toward the achievement of an understanding of true beauty.7 Aristotle advocated drawing for the purpose of making people judges of the beauty of the human form-something that for free men transcended what was merely useful,8 such as reading and writing.

To facilitate the achievement of the broad cultural ideal three levels of education developed which cor- responded with the contemporary terms-elementary, secondary, and higher education. Elementary education in Greece began at the age of seven and extended into early adolescence or later depending

on the economic circumstances of the parents. Sec- ondary education has often been described by historians of education as the more advancel level of elementary education which extended from about puberty to the middle teens, to be followed by a form of higher education called the ephebia. In the presence of another level of education which more truly represented higher education, however, the fashionable and superficial ephebia is better thought of as secondary education. The museums and libraries of Alexandria, Rhodes, and Antioch, and Pergamon furnished the ancient world with higher education.

Within this loose system of education the subject of art found a place and it flourished. Our records of what happened at this dawning of Western Civili- zation are far from complete but we do know that by the middle of the fourth century B.C. elementary art education had become established in the Pelopon- nesian town of Sicyon. There is a possibility of a Sicyonian bias on the part of Roman historians but no other sources remain other than those referred to by Varro and subsequent by Pliny.9 By 300 B.C. pupils were dividing their time between the teachers of letters, music, gymnastics, and drawing. And some second century records refer to school examinations in drawing.10

Precisely what the curriculum consisted of during this period is by no means certain. The pupils are thought to have painted on tablets of boxwood,l to have drawn with lead or charcoal and also to have sketched on wax tablets.l2 The subject matter of the drawing may well have been the human figure, not only from what Aristotle wrote but from the very name applied to the Greek drawing teacher. It meant, literally, "drawing from a live model."3 We cannot be sure that this information is correct or complete but in the absence of a better explanation it is extremely reasonable and fully in keeping with the Greek reverence for their concept of the ideal human form.

The point of demarcation between the training of professional artists-the painter and the sculptor- and the education of the young aristocrat was quite clear. The apprentice system served one while the formal classroom emerged to serve the other. The separation of general and vocational education be- comes less distinct when we turn to higher education.

10



RRT In GEnERAL EDUCIITIOn

Rn historital reuiew uith

contemporary impli ctions

Above, "The Mind of Man," by Peter Petronio (Daly-Max Stu- dio). Created from graphic material in the files of the Bettman Archives on the occasion of its 25th anniversary in 1963.

It is sufficient here to note that the study of the history of art developed in the museums, principally within the one at Pergamon in Asia-Minor. The successors to Alexander, Atalos and Eumenes, created a royal museum in their capital city in which they housed their collections of Hellenic art, thus providing the impetus to the writing of the first systematic history of art.14 We cannot call this art activity "general" education but in view of the presence of the history of art in the present day curriculums of schools, colleges, museums, and gal- leries it has a worthy place in this essay. Hellenistic Athens to Renaissance Florence: Were it not for the part that Roman civilization played in perpetuating and diffusing Greek culture it would not have enjoyed the pervasive influence it has had on western civilization. And yet, insofar as art education itself, is concerned, we can have little commendation to grant to Rome. The aristocratic tradition of col- lecting works of Greek art must be considered an educational tool but it also became debased when uninformed people attempted to emulate the cultured Roman aristocracy.15 The Romans modified the Greek curriculum drastically and confined the atten- tion of pupils largely to literary and moral studies, with a smattering of mathematics. The austere concepts of morality held by most Romans left little place for art in their formal system of education. Exceptions existed, of course: Roman emperors learned to paint and draw-but not to labor at sculpture. And the Roman general, Aemilius Paul- lus, employed Greeks to teach his sons painting among numerous other subjects.lG

With the advent of Christianity art was seen as a means of indoctrination. But it was intended only as an imperfect vehicle for the transmission of Chris- tianity to those who were illiterate. Throughout the Middle Ages the religious symbolism of art was never held to be in any way comparable in import- ance with written and spoken words. Ironically, and much to the dismay of Church officialsl7 the common people largely appropriated artistic symbolism by the fourteenth century. Only among the elite of the nobility was an exception to be found. Like the Greeks before them this group had initially been trained as warriors. The science of warfare remained the focus of the young squire's education even in

11



more peaceful times; but the science of love became another tournament worthy of study-and one of the desirable accomplishments in this strategy for the squire included learning to draw.l8

The centuries of Roman and Medieval society tended to be barren ones for art in general education. A change of mood became apparent, however, in the fourteenth century courts of Italian noblemen and magnates. This powerful coterie came to revere the classical world almost indiscriminately. Art became a part of their lives and that great intellectual figure and friend of Popes, Alberti, frequently affirmed the educational value of the fine arts. He referred both to the Roman emperors who had been trained in drawing and painting and to the practical advantages that drawing skills afforded the soldier and the architect.19 Later, Castiglione also praised painting as an honor- able study and he, too, cited historical precedents for his point of view.20 In France, Rabelais included drawing as part of education;21 and in England, under the spell of Italian culture, Sir Thomas Elyot included drawing as a part of the appropriate education for future leaders.22

The debilitating schism existing in men's minds between vocational art education and general art education prevented general art curriculums from developing, however. Vergerio in his influential treatise on education On Character and Liberal Studies (1404), states clearly that drawing has no place in his plan for liberal studies. In his estimation it belonged only in the profession of painting.23

In spite of the recommendations of influential persons, school curriculums did not include art. Medieval practices remained in education until the nineteenth century. Even today, educators glumly concede that ten to fifty years elapse before new ideas find their way into classroom practice.

A point of interest for the art educator lies with the growth of art in the lives of noblewomen during the Renaissance-particularly in Spain.24 Girls were often taught to make designs and embroider them and also to design their own dresses. But only rarely did they practice any of the so-called fine arts.25 The ladies-with their brothers-also enjoyed the oppor- tunity of the finest art education possible through their social intercourse with artists and through the presence of fine paintings and carvings in their palaces. The Opening of the New World: In the years follow- ing the Renaissance, art suffered more setbacks than advances. It was removed even further from the common life of the people by the plunders of aristocratic collectors26 and by the destruction that occurred at the hands of unthinking Reformation fanatics. Although art was referred to in the writings of Comenius, Franke, and Rousseau little or nothing was done. The least damage, in fact, occurred in those parts of Europe where the Roman Catholic Church continued to hold sway.

On the newly settled North American continent

much of the European tradition continued. The dis- senting groups did not include art in their formal education systems but they did not exclude it from their lives. Likewise the aristocratic settlers also carried with them the traditions and practices they had enjoyed in Europe among them being the artistic instruction of their daughters.27 As the colonies pros- pered the middle classes emulated their social super- iors and private art teachers advertised their classes in newspapers of Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Charleston and New Orleans. Judging by their num- bers alone this group of entrepreneurs must have influenced the lives of many people.28

An exception to the rule of merely transplanting European practices was the vision of the Anglo-Irish clergyman, Dean George Berkeley. In the second quarter of the eighteenth century he set out to estab- lish a college for the then not unusual purpose of converting the "Savage Americans" to Christianity.29 The interesting fact is that among the people Berke- ley brought with him was a man to fill the position of "professor of drawing, painting, and architecture." Political intrigue caused the project to founder, but had it survived the story of art education in America might have been much different since Berkeley's expressed intent was to promote general and not professional education.

A truly American call for art education sprang from the pen of Benjamin Franklin.30 Drawing was considered by Franklin an appropriate subject because it was useful, because drawings could convey what words could not, and because it was a desirable competency to serve people living in eighteenth century America. Established educational practices, nevertheless, remained in the inflexible grip of the outmoded classical curriculum in spite of the oppor- tunities seemingly provided by a new culture in the making. And Franklin's proposal for art instruction fared no better than his well known recommendations for the teaching of the English language. The task remained for men and women of the nineteenth and twentieth century to resolve. A Challenge from History: Historical study can be fascinating but for it to possess more than an antiquarian interest it must be interpreted and better still must have an influence on current thinking. In conclusion, therefore, the events of the past will be placed beside the problems of the present.

Currently our own society, like that of ancient Greece, is in a state of crisis. It is being transformed daily. Under such circumstances people are in par- ticular need of the confidence and security of group affiliations. An effective system of education can offer this security. The Greeks gave this to their people in such an enlightened form that it outlasted the civilization. Much of the world continues to share in the heritage of this thinking but it is being challenged. Insidiously persuasive social concepts are finding favor throughout the world that are anti- thetical to the Western cultural tradition.

12



Art in general education has had a chequered history, because its place in society and in education was not made clear. But the same is true of instruction in both our native tongue and physical education, and no one now would deny the need for a population that is both robust and literate. Upper class children once drew in order to develop their capacities for appreciation, while the creator, the artisan, was thought to be incapable of appreciating what he had done. Today, we no longer live in an aristocratic society. General education is literally for all people. Furthermore, it is becoming increasingly difficult to draw the line between practice and theory

in art. All belong under the umbrella of art. The question that remains is whether art in any form contributes to the contemporary educational picture. The unpleasant truth is that art educators have not yet begun to respond to this question effectively. The task is a pressing need of the unique present. One may hope that the force of historical precedent will compel us to recognize the dangers inherent in not being able to communicate with society at large.

Guy Hubbard is Assistant Professor of Education, Indiana University, Bloomington.

REFERENCES

1. Logan, Frederick M., Growth of Art in American Schools, New York: Harper and Brothers, 1955.

2. Green, Harry Beck, "The Introduction of Art as a General Education Subject in American Schools," unpublished doctoral dissertation: Stanford University, 1950. Belshe, Francis B., "A History of Art Education in the Public Schools of the United States," unpublished doctoral dissertation: Yale University, 1946. Rios, John F., "History of Art Education in the Sec- ondary Schools of the United States," unpublished doctoral dissertation: University of Texas, 1954. Saunders, Robert J., "The Contributions of Horace Mann, Mary Peabody Mann, and Elizabeth Peabody to Art Education in the United States," unpublished doctoral dissertation: Pennsylvania State University, 1961.

3. Bosanquet, Bernard, The Education of the Young in the Republic of Plato, Cambridge: The University Press, 1917, p. 50.

4. Jaeger, Werner, Paideia: The Ideals of Greek Culture, Vol. 3, translated by Gilbert Highet, Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1944, p. 314.

5. Jaeger, Vols. 1-3. Marrou, H. I., A History of Educa- tion in Antiquity, translated by George Lamb, London: Sheed and Ward, 1956.

6. Jaeger, Vol. 3, p. 229.

7. Plato, Republic, translated by B. Jowett, Third Edition, Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1888, p. 87.

8. Aristotle, Politics, translated by B. Jowett, Vol. 1, Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1888, p. 247.

9. Walston (Waldstein), Sir Charles, Alcamenes and the Establishment of the Classical Type in Greek Art, Cambridge, England: The University Press, 1926, p. 83.

10.

11.

Marrou, H. I., p. 133.

Gaius Plinius Secundus, The Elder Pliny's Chapters on the History of Art, Commentary and Introduction by E. Sellers, translated by K. Jex-Blake, London: Mac- millan, 1896, p. 119.

12. Freeman, Kenneth J., Schools of Hellas, London: Macmillan, 1922, p. 116.

13. Marrou, p. 133.

14. Grenier, Albert, The Roman Spirit in Religion, Thought, and Art, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1926, p. 239.

15. Dill, Samuel, Roman Society from Nero to Marcus Aurelius, London: Macmillan and Company, Limited, 1919, p. 177.

16. Plutarch, "Aemilius Paulus," in Parallel Lives, Vol. VI, translated by Bernodotte Perrin, London: William Heinemann, 1918, p. 371.

17. Coulton, G. G., Art and the Reformation, Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1928.

18. Chaucer, Geoffrey, The Complete Works, F. N. Robin- son (ed.), Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1933, p. 19.

19. Santayana, S. G., Two Renaissance Educators: Alberti and Piccolomini, Boston, Massachusetts: Meador Pub- lishing Company, 1930, p. 69.

20. Castiglione, Count Baldassare, The Book of the Cour- tier, translated by Sir Thomas Hoby, 1561, London: J. M. Dent and Sons Limited, n.d., p. 77.

21. Rabelais, The Life of Gargantua and the Heroic Deeds of Pantagruel, translated by Sir Thomas Urquhart, London: George Routledge and Sons Limited, 1890, p. 76.

22. Elyot, Sir Thomas, The Gouvernour, first published, 1531, New York: E. P. Dutton and Company, Inc., 1937, p. 29.

23. Cannon, Mary Agnes, The Education of Women Dur- ing the Renaissance, Washington, D.C.: Catholic Uni- versity of America, 1916, p. 43.

24. Watson, Foster (ed.), Vives and the Renascence Edu- cation of Women, London: Edward Arnold, 1912, p. 46.

25. Cannon, p. 44.

26. Crouch, Joseph, Puritanism and Art, New York: Cassell and Company Limited, 1910, p. 153.

27. Woody, Thomas, A History of Women's Education in the United States, Vol. I, New York: The Science Press, 1929, p. 286.

28. Dow, George Francis, The Arts and Crafts in New England, 1704-1775, Topsfield, Massachusetts: The Wayside Press, 1927.

29. Dunlap, William, History of the Rise and Progress of the Arts of Design in the United States, Vol. I, New York: George P. Scott and Company, 1834, p. 27.

30. Woody, Thomas (ed.), Educational Views of Benjamin Franklin, New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1934, p. 27.

13



art in general education: an historical review with contemporary implications

Documents