Hello Section

Hey it's Chris your partner for this project. Just checking in to see if you're there? We're going to be writing our collaborative paper on Art Education and Politics. More specifically, what are some of the motives behind the government and private institutions wanting to put a stop to funding for art programs in K-12 schools as well as public art programs and broadcasters like PBS.

Of course, we'll use this wiki as a means of communication but we can also do so via email or phone if you like. My email is cdavis122@student.gsu.edu and my phone number is 912-441-7281. Looking forward to hearing back from you!

Welcome to the Art Education & Politics home page.

To get started, just click Edit and start typing. If you have any questions about working in a Wikispaces project, check out our Project help page.

Pages in this project

The importance of art education cannot be understated. It has afforded many across the nation the opportunity for growth & development and without it it would affect many people including myself. The removal of funding for the arts programs nationwide has been a recent topic proposed by government and one that would provide more damage than any type of gain. It is known that the NEA (National Endowment for the Arts) budget only amounts to a a very small percentage of the total federal budget. With art programs the positives highly outweigh the negatives so what would make one think that the cutting of the those funds would be necessary.

Art education functions as a source for artistic growth of innate abilities (Thierry de Duve). With the removal of these programs from grade schools would have a drastic effect. Imagine being a youth with so much potential to expand within a certain concentration but not having the opportunity to do so. Learning and experiencing art at a young age has proven to be vital. Think of any current artist whether that be a painter, musician, actor, etc. and you'll be certain to find out that they were involved in some form of art program growing up. Where would a number of singers be without having the opportunity to be involved in the school choir. Or where would an actor be without the chance of learning and performing in a theatre class. All this to say that without arts programs much so needed.

It is noted that the funding cuts for art programs is mainly geared towards cutting into the national deficit that our country is facing. But cutting these programs would only cut into that deficit a petite amount Source 02 (paragraph 3). Certainly this amount doesn't give enough reason to have to end all funding for the arts. This would be detrimental to education in a few ways. The removal of museums would evaporate that chance to learn not solely on the topic of art but more precisely the history of it. I know that from m own visits to the high museum I would constantly come across an overlap in information. I remember in one of my first art courses I had to base my project off of this artist by the name of Daniel Arsham and then having been able to see his work in the High Museum was an up close visual reiteration of what i initially learned. This overlap of information would derive from previous art history lectures and that relation brought everything full circle.
external image resized_Arsham.ashx?h=540&w=360&la=en&hash=61C6F2B4F8FD475A91F644E8695F28D770FFB703
Regarding this dilemma in arts education, The Architecture of the Evicted article contains similar themes in that capitalist influences once again look to contain the people of society. In this case, by pushing out art in an attempt to prevent future generations from thinking outside the box. Which would result in the upbringing of a society that is unable to push forward through revolutionizing their thoughts and actions as they no longer have the freedom to learn or know what it means to express their creative individuality.

It is a similar tactic by the government that has been used to gentrify previously impoverished or less developed areas within a city in order to make it more attractive or fit the newly modernized state of the rest of the city's vision through the eyes of the government. They continue to downplay the impact and importance of the arts in which they attempt to cover up by labeling it as a new standard or curriculum as the academy did throughout the centuries in Thierry de Duve's, "When Form Has Become Attitude - and Beyond." What the government fails to understand is that artistic creativity and talent must be nurtured and challenged in order for proper growth in society to occur.

With that in mind, a stand can still be taken by current and upcoming artists due to the simple fact that art is not only an expression of an individual but its also use as an expression of the times and history that we see and go through within the cultures and societies around the world. Despite the government's plans to decrease and halt funding for arts education in schools the current art world that exists will indeed bring in a new revolution to break through history as art has always done in the past. As Neil Degrasse Tyson said in the video link, art contains the force of critical thinkings and creativity which in itself is the driving force of innovation in the world of science and beyond. It is our duty as artists to bring attention and speak against what politics is trying to do to arts education and broadcasting programs such as NPR and PBS.

As a human race we need the arts. As kids we all learn to draw, write and just to create in general. It's what makes us who we are. Without the Arts, it will be a hard task for the youth to find ways to express that innate creative ability that Thierry de Duve harped on in his article. I always grew up wanting to be apart of something that helped me express my creative urges. And to take that opportunity away would result in more negative than positive.


NPR and PBS Budget Cut
Neil Degrasse Tyson on Art's Impact (VIDEO)


De Duve, Thierry. (n.d.)

When Form Has Become Attitude - And Beyond,


Deutsche, Rosalyn (1990)
Architecture of the Evicted.