the artist, the art teacher, and misplaced faith: creativity and art education

National Art Education Association

The Artist, the Art Teacher, and Misplaced Faith: Creativity and Art EducationAuthor(s): Jim WrightSource: Art Education, Vol. 43, No. 6 (Nov., 1990), pp. 50-57Published by: National Art Education AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3193235 .

Accessed: 15/06/2014 06:36

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 62.122.79.21 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 06:36:48 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

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

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3193235?origin=JSTOR-pdf

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


I /tt

L~~~N~

The Artist, the Art Teacher, and Misplaced

Archimedes leaps from his bath and runs naked through the streets shouting: "Eureka! I have found it. I have found it." (Madigan and Elwood, 1983 pp. 2, 3.) A

scrap of paper blows across Mark Twain's feet and inspires him to write his best story. A life of migraine headaches gives Lewis Carroll images for Alice in Wonderland. Nikola Telsa visualizes complex machines

completed in his mind that function when built, and become world shaping inven- tions. Picasso, in outrage, painted "Guer- nica" in a burst of astonishing creativity and in a relatively short time (Madigan and Elwood, 1983, Perkins 1981).

Creativity. What is it? Flashes of inspiration ... serendipity ... biological gift ... the product of drugs or passion? Does creativity transpire as Mozart stated: "... in a flash, complete in my mind, all at once" (Perkins, p. 168), or is it as Edison stated:" ... one percent inspiration and 99% perspiration." (Pyramid Films, 1968).

Art education has a long standing love affair with the notion of creativity. At one time it was seen as the path to solving our problems and giving substance to our programs. Yet the historical approach to "creative activities" failed to provide sufficient meaning and substance in school art programs. Art came to be seen as a "frill."

When creativity was the watchword and focal point of art education, the field was concurrently embracing definitions of creativity that were inextricably linked to novelty and spontaneity. Curricula were designed to promote spontaneous and divergent behavior in the belief that, ipso-facto, creative learning was taking place.

These concepts also developed in the time-bound context of a dominant non- representational aesthetic (abstract expressionism), heart-felt stances against copying, and eventually a non-directive philosophy for education generally and art

50 Art Education/November 1990

Jim Wright

,.,. Wb;,

l?rapb'u)r



Photos from "Young At Art" Program, San Diego City Schools. Photo courtesy of Kay Wagner, Program Manager for Visual & Performing Arts, San Diego City Schools. Photos by Dianne Bess.

v--.. jjil

- - =~~~~-'--

Faith: Creativity and Art Education

education specifically. Art education focused on the spontaneous and unstructured partly because of a belief that the adult should not interfere with the child.

Art education ... is primarily concerned with the effect that the process has on the individual ... [and] ... it is not the adult's answer but the child's stirring toward his own answer that is critical (Lowenfeld and Brittain, 1970, p. 10).

It is much more important to develop creativity than competence in children, because creativity cannot easily be learned at older age levels, whereas it is doubtful if one can teach youngsters of elementary school age very much in the way of artistic skills and competencies. (Lowenfeld and Brittain, 1970, p. 46).

Lowenfeld's invaluable humanistic message came to be interpreted as:

nurturant process over content and skill development. (In fairness it may be these were misapplications of his ideas.) These concepts, however, evolved into a model not only for the young child but for all children and even the way art teachers were to be trained. Statements like: "Children who are left alone ... may develop into gifted artists, unspoiled." (Kellogg, 1967, p. 17) became tacit belief structures for generations of art teachers.

Attempts to analyze and define creativity typically identified four primary functions: fluency, flexibility, originality (or novelty), and openness (or playfulness) (Torrance, 1962. Guilford, 1965). These early identifi- ers may have led art educators to regard fluency, quickness, and one's ease in changing concepts as the models for promoting creativity. Linked with novelty and playfulness, we quickly lost direction and purpose.

Freud's view of creativity as an uncon-

Art Education/November 1990 51

-- -

C 1-11



scious primary process and his portrayal of symbolic thought as being like that of the artist, child, and psychotic further confused the issue ... implying artists were childish and irrational. (Kronsky, 1984, p. 98).

The pervasive concepts were: children are more creative when left alone: creativity is free, unstructured, spontaneous, divergent; and art should be fun, playful, and somehow unfettered by the world of work.

Art education has evolved away from the "creative activities" orientation of the past. We have come to see the content of our programs as more structured and sequential (Eisner, 1972). We've come to question art learning inextricably linked to maturation, and the art room as bastion of creativity. (Eisner, 1973-74). It even became popular to question our faith in creativity itself. (Alexander, 1981). As things evolved, the National Art Education Association eventually helped set the stage for D.B.A.E. with its A.I.M. statement defining art learning as: work, values, and language (Feldman, 1982, pp. 4-5).

Where does creativity fit into this new picture? Why is it important to consider at this time? Because fundamentally, creativity and art are inseparable. As Michael stated, studio art is [and must be] the heart of art education. (Michael, 1980). The definitions we give to what we do are structured by what we value and understand. Our definitions of ourselves become our operational parameters. In other words, we are what we believe we are.

The current emphasis on D.B.A.E., however valuable, has the potential of focusing too much on structure and system and diluting the desirable aspects of creative development and personal causation that make art in the schools unique and valuable. By calling our atten- tion away from expression and creation, this emphasis may cause us to lose that which makes us unique.

Yet creativity as conceived in the past will not serve us now or in the future.

This paper argues that creativity is the essence of true learning, is valid of all subjects, and is fundamental to making, viewing, and understanding art. However, creativity viewed as undirected spontaneity is a misapplication and misunderstanding of the creative process.

For this discussion the artist as creator will be the model for analysis. His processes, his approaches and pathways can serve to help us better understand creativity and more effectively guide students to become more productive and creative.

Creating is incremental, evolutional, continual, and it is a learned process. The notion of the "eureka moment" with solutions, like light bulbs, popping into one's brain spontaneously, should be discred- ited. Research into the behavior of artists and scientists, and experimentation in the business sector provide considerable arguments against spontaneity and accident (Crosby 1968, Van Grundy 1987, Ray 1986).

For creativity and art to be inseparable, we need to define creativity (and con- versely art education) as learned and practiced activities that are directed to purposeful expressive ends. The professional artist as model can be a good one, because the practicing artist is immersed in the constant and evolving nature of his/her




"Young At Art" Program, San Diego City Schools. Photo courtesy of Kay Wagner, Program Manager for Visual & Performing Arts, San Diego City Schools. Photos by Dianne Bess.

work. The artist individually defines problems or questions and then, over and over again, explores variations on this concept until a point of satisfaction and certification is reached. This satisfaction, or product, invariably leads to new questions, new paths to be explored. Sometimes the artist finds satisfaction, sometimes failure, but always he or she is confronted with new questions.

The processes of the artist so described are ones of work as creating. The artist builds on prior learning and problems solved. The artist's work, no matter how spontaneous in appearance, is the product of considerable accumulated skills, knowledge, and effort. John Canaday in discuss- ing Jackson Pollock gives us a good ex- ample: 'The apogee of gestural [painting] ... Each splash, drip, or spatter is a controlled accident, the result of the artist's sensitivity - developed through experience." (Canaday, 1983, p. 132.)

Canaday continues: The "recipes" in art

are the accumulated knowledge and experience that every good [ artist] works from, whether he is modern, conservative, abstract or whatever. For all its spontaneity, [even an] abstract expressionist painting is an application of this knowledge and experience. The paintings are often improvisations but they are improvised from resources and disciplines that have become second nature to the artist (Canaday, p. 132-134).

Works of art are evolutionary. They are continuances built on past learning and experience. The successful solution happens because, and only because, of considerable rehearsal and labor to solve other related questions. This process is true of the scientist, writer, musician, or anyone involved in creating or inventing. (Perkins 1981, Fabun, 1968).

Kaiser Aluminum has helped give operational meaning to creativity and sees the creative process as much the same in any field. They define creativity as an




interrelated process of forming an original pattern (invention) or of revealing one (discovery). Man is seen as an organism, part of a changing dynamic environment, yet uniquely capable of reflecting on change and being able to direct it (Fabun, 1968). They suggest the following steps are followed by each individual who is successfully creative: 1. desire ... wanting to create something original; 2. preparation ... the collection of materials, ideas from pertinent and seemingly unlikely sources; 3. manipulation ... playing around ... the collected materials are looked at from innumerable perspectives; 4. incubation ... frequently the problem is set aside while others are pursued; 5. intimation ... a feeling of premonition that the solution is near; 6. illumination ... the solution is revealed (it is this moment that is sometimes called the "Eureka" moment); and 7. verification ... the idea is examined

Girl from Laos. Photo ? 1986 Vivienne della Grotta

and valued ... to see if it "works" (Fabun, 1968, p. 9-12). Of course, not every step is necessary for every creative act, but the moment of truth is near the end of the process and comes from preparation, desire, intimacy with the problem and process, and faith in its completion. As Beittel states, the courage and faith to pursue and intuit wholeness dictates the artist's irreversible dialogue with the future. (1985, p. 7).

Perkins demystifies much of the earlier thinking on creativity and gives us a unique way of looking at the creative process. By studying artists and scientists as they work he draws conclusions that have considerable potential for art teachers. His work will therefore be examined in some detail.

Perkins found that creators could, in fact, report on what they were thinking, as they did it, without interference with the process of being creative. He disallows the notion that creativity is fragile or unfathom- able. In The Mind's Best Work he documents the unreliability of artists' accounts for "Eureka" moments and traces the background development of their ideas, sometimes over years, that lead to the finished product. He states " ... creating in the arts and sciences is a natural compre- sendible extension and orchestration of ordinary everyday abilities of perception, understanding, [and] memory" (Perkins, p. 4). Creation is therefore not the mysterious product of the unconscious but rather the product of hundreds of unattended hidden mental processes, much like walking. The artist attends to his work, not the sequential steps of the process. In recollection the artist may remember the "insight" as a flash of inspiration when in fact it is the accumulated product of intense thought, preparation, and desire. (Perkins, 1981, pp. 11-45).

The creative act is a holistic one. It requires a blending of concept and feeling, analysis and intuition. Feeling and knowing become one, and the artist recognizes the merits of relying on the "rightness" or "wrongness" of solutions based on his or her increased awareness and sensitivity to the selected problem.

Makers maximize long-term efficiency in evaluation by noticing difficulties rather than looking harder for them in systematic




ways. But focus increases sensitivity greatly so makers use focused evaluation in learning to notice, in making especially critical decisions, and in monitoring aspects of their work they know present special difficulties. (Perkins, 1981, p. 114).

Perkins finds the artist is fundamentally goal oriented and does not rely on fluency and flexibility as much of the traditional literature on creativity suggests. Rather what should be emphasized are the processes of search, focus, and selection. (Perkins, 1981, pp. 159-162).

He proposes the following strategies are more consistent with creative behavior and could be followed if one sought to be more creative: 1) tryto be original; 2) converge on the problem gradually; 3) strive for objectivity; 4) search only as necessary and prudent; 5) try, but don't expect to be correct the first time; 6) use your own judgement and experience; 7) when stuck, change the problem; 8) use concrete visual representations of ideas (drawings, note- books); 9) focus and practice within the context of the problem, and 10) criticise, evaluate, and revise your behavior. (Perk- ins, 1981, pp. 130-218).

While similar to the steps Kaiser suggests, the emphasis here shifts away from any attempt to deal with as many unique solutions as possible to replicate more closely the actions of the professional artist, scientist, or creator. Time is not wasted looking for many divergent problems and solutions but is instead concen- trated on a specific goal. The painter is seeking to resolve that painting, the scientist to solve this problem, the inventor to create a thing.

It has also been found that certain environmental conditions facilitate creating while others frustrate the process. "Culture, elaborated and developed, makes creativity possible, and in turn, is enriched by creativity. The relationship between culture and creativity is a reciprocal relation of interdependence." (Fabun, 1968, p. 26) Cultures, and the classroom is a culture in miniature, flourish when they encourage creativity and wither when they do not. The total climate available to a person, when positive, promotes innovation, and when negative, hinders progress. (Maslow, 1962, Rogers, 1961, Wallach and Kogan, 1965).

Native American youth. Photo courtesy of Leona Zastrow

The characteristics of creative environ- ments have been identified as providing: 1) sufficient resources to provide time and opportunity; 2) a free flowing communica- tions exhange between individuals; 3) a reward system that socially or economi- cally rewards the creator; 4) privacy and non-interrupted time to be alone to think and produce; 5) a climate of acceptance and nurture; 6) opportunities to form groups of common interest; 7) education that rewards and encourages free inquiry as opposed to imparting known information or values. (Fabun, 1968, p. 26). The suc- cesses of various organizations which promote creative behavior, either by individuals or groups, emphasize these conditions. (Crosby, 1968, p. 29.)

What then of Archimedes, Twain, Carroll, Telsa, Picasso, and the others? Popularized myth has encouraged the notions that their breakthrough contribu- tions to mankind were flashes of spontaneous inspiration. However, further investiga- tion tells us otherwise. Archimedes' solution came to him after he had worked on the problem of displacement given him by King Hieron for a period of weeks. Archimedes was already recognized as a great scientist and consumed by his work. The problem was mulled over and over, and reformulated many times while the goal was held constant. Twain was in-




trigued by the character of Joan of Arc, first brought to him by chance on a scrap of paper at age 14. He went on to study and labor over Personal Recollections of Joan of Arc for 46 years. (Madigan and Elwood, pp. 15-16). Lewis Carroll's migraine headaches plagued him throughout his lifetime and provided imagery that fit into story lines he developed and labored over for years (Madigan and Elwood, pp. 34- 35). Telsa's solutions for alternating current transmission, and poly-phase and single- phase motors were the products of problems of his time and culture, labored over by himself and others, for decades. (Madi- gan and Elwood, pp. 11-14). Picasso's masterpiece was the culmination of a commission for the Spanish Republican

Photo 0 1989 Vievm. ddla Grotta

government that he had been trying to solve for some time. Inspired by the bombing of Vizcaya he then furiously found the solution to Guernica in six weeks. (Madigan and Elwood, pp. 98-101).

In all cases the solutions came to the prepared mind, immersed in the problem and process, and were the peak of a process curve that usually encompassed years of work.

In Summation We see then that creating is neither a mystical nor a spontaneous act. Perkins' work shows us that creating is another function of the prepared mind at work. Furthermore the body of evidence on conditions promoting creating are also possible in the art program.

The implications for art education seem obvious and within reach. The idea of creativity as spontaneity, or as a separate activity we can "work into" our curriculum, have not proven themselves to be particu- lady functional. We have traveled that path and found, instead of our panacea, a dead end. But the dead end is not because of a failure of creativity, it is a lack of understanding of the processes and conditions of creativity that have sometimes led to superficiality and banality.

Creativity should be seen as directed process toward specific goals. The artist needs to be understood as a knowledge- able prepared person who works through related problems in a purposeful and sequential manner. We need to teach our students the "how" and "what" that artists, (or historians, or critics) actually do. We need to understand that the artist does not bounce from one thing to another with little sense of direction or connectedness. Students need to be taught meaningful content and functional skills. They can then advance to the stage of personal inventive- ness. They need to be encouraged to be "making arr and be given freedom, security, and encouragement.

The art teacher should consider being model versus advisor. This implies we all need to pursue our own struggle to create. Not personally understanding how to produce limits us if we attempt to help others create.

Curricular implications also present themselves. Creating conceived in this

56 Art Educadon/November 1990



-^ - 7 _ -- ,

Photo ? 1989 Vivienne della Grotta

manner suggests that fragmented survey, or breadth kinds of experience, will only continue to frustrate true growth and understanding in creating art. It might well be that curricula should be structured around a few challenging concepts, processes, or problems. We cannot expect our students to really create if we do not give them the time, skills, nurturing, and conditions to do so. For art education to truly mature, we need to unshackle our traditional notions of creativity and invent a new art education dedicated to substance and meaning.

Jim Wright is an Associate Professor in the Department of Art Education at Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond.

References Alexander, R. (1981). The ghost of creativity in art

education. Art Education, 34 (4), 28-30.

Anderson, H. (Ed.). (1959). Creativity and its cultivation. New York: Harper and Brothers.

Barron, F. (1969). Creative person and creative process. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Beittel, K. (1985). In Herberholz, U. and Alexan- der, K. Developing artistic and perceptual awareness: Art practice in the elementary classroom (5th Ed.). Dubuque, Iowa: William C. Brown.

Canaday, J. (1983). What is art? An introduction to painting, sculpture and architecture. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

Crosby, A. (1968). Creativity and performance in industrial organization. New York: Tavistock Publications.

Fabun, D. (Ed.). (1968). Creativity. Unpublished paper. Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical Corporation.

Eisner, E. (1972). Educating artistic vision. New York, MacMillan.

Eisner, E. (1973-74). Examining some myths in art education. Studies in Art Education, 15 (3), 7-16.

Feldman, E. B. (1982). As I see it. Art in the mainstream: A statement of value and commitment. Art Education, 35 (2), pp. 4-5.

Gordon, W. H. (1961). Synectics: The development of creative capacity. New York: Harper.

Gruber, H. E. (1962). Contemporary approaches to creative thinking: A symposium. California: Atherton Press.

Guilford, J. P. (1965). The structure of intellect. Psychological Bulletin, 53.

Howard, N. (1980). Business probes the creative spark. Best of Business, reprinted from Dunn's Review, 2 (2), 16-22.

Kagan J., Kogan N. (1970). Individuality and cognitive performance, in P. Mussen (Ed.). Carmichael's manual of child psychology, Vol. 1, New York: John Wiley.

Kellogg, Rhoda. (1967). The psychology of children's art. New York: CRM.

Keil, J. M. (1985). The creative mystique: How to manage it, nurture it, and make it work. New York, New York: John Wiley.

Kronsky, B. (1984) The psychology of art. American Artist, October, 10(1), 14, 97-99.

Lowenfeld, V. and Brittain, W. L. (1970). Creative and mental growth (5th Ed.). New York: MacMillan.

Madigan, C. O. and Elwood, A. (1983) Brain- storms and thunderbolts: How creative genius works. New York: Macmillan.

Maslow, A. H. (1959). "Creativity in self-actualiz- ing people." in Anderson, H. (Ed.). Creativity and its cultivation, New York, Harper and Brothers.

Maslow, A. H. (1962). Toward a psychology of being. Princeton, New Jersey: Van Nostrand.

McMullan, W. E. (1976) Creative individuals: Paradoxical personages: The Journal of Creative Behavior, 10 (4), 265-275.

Michael, J. (1980). The studio art experience, the heart of art education. Art Education, 33, No. (2), 15- 19.

Perkins, D. N. (1981). The mind's best work. Massachusetts, Harvard University Press.

Ray, L. (1986). Creativity in business. Garden City, New York: Doubleday and Company.

Rogers, C. (1969). Freedom to learn. Columbus, Ohio: Merrill.

Torrance, E. P. (1962). Guiding creative talent. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Van Gundy, A. (1987). Creative problem solving: A guide for trainers and management. New York, Quorum Books.

Wallach, M. A. and Kogan, N. (1965). Modes of thinking in young children. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Why man creates. (1968) Pyramid Films.




the artist, the art teacher, and misplaced faith: creativity and art education

Documents