11 Course Leaders: 20 Questions
二十問


A division into specialisms also challenges the group critique which is commonly practiced in the broad-based model, where students discuss each others’, work, assumptions and values. Harris thinks this group-critique model can potentially ‘lead to a conceptual, stylistic or attitudinal homogeneity’ which he doesn’t like. Instead, he thinks Wimbledon, with its subject divisions, offers a more democratic and pluralistic approach – one which emphasises diversity.

Whether it is ‘Thinking through Making’, or ‘Making through Thinking’, historically, contemporary art practice and art education also included an art history and critical theory component. This also highlights another key question of BA art education: whether art history and theory should be taught as part of the course. Sarah Rowles first entered Goldsmiths as an student of art history, but changed her mind after studying for a year, instead graduating from the BA Fine Art practice programme. As a graduate who had experienced both disciplines at Goldsmiths, she asked the BA Fine Art course leader Michael Archer the reason for not teaching art history in the practice course.

Michael Archer is not a practicing artist, instead he has a History of Art degree and a prolific career as a critic and writer. Archer agrees that knowledge of art history can benefit anyone who practices art. Nevertheless, he also believes that the studying of art history ‘should not be prioritised over having knowledge of other things.’ For Archer, art history is as important as any other personal or professional development which helps the student to become an artist, whether it is the craft skills of knowing how to paint, or familiarity with the world outside the art college.

有方向區分的專業設置,也是對另一種藝術中‘Convenor’討論會的一種挑戰。哈裡斯認為這種‘Convenor’討論會,會可能引導學生們進入一種‘觀念、風格及態度上的同一性’,而哈裡斯本人並不贊同這種現象。取而代之的,一種更為民主、多元、強調多樣性的教學模式是他所認為溫布爾登學院所能提供的。

無論是‘以思考帶領創作’或是反其道而行之的‘以創作引領思考’的模式,在當代藝術教育中,藝術理論跟創作往往有著緊密的聯繫。這也往往引出另外一個藝術教育的問題,在本科純藝專業裡,需要開設藝術史和藝術理論的課程嗎?這本書的作者薩拉·羅斯最先是以一名藝術史學生的身份來到金史密斯學院,在一年的學習後,她改變主意轉到了純藝專業。作為一名在金史密斯學院對兩門不同專業都有經歷過的畢業生,羅斯問到學院的課程主任邁克爾·阿徹(Michael Archer)為什麽不在純藝術課程裡開設藝術史課程。

邁克爾·阿徹雖然並不是藝術家出身,但擁有藝術史學位的他是一名著作等身的藝評人和作家。阿徹認為藝術史常識對任何一位藝術創作者都有幫助,但他同時也提出對藝術史的學習‘不應被提升至比對其他知識的學習更高的地位’。阿徹教授認為學習藝術史和學習創作技藝以及職業規劃課程對藝術家有著同等的幫助。

.

For Archer, the most important reason of not including art history classes as part of the pedagogy was the worry of potentially restricting students’ curiosity, imagination and willingness to experiment. It is therefore left up to the students themselves to find out more about art history, should they believe that it would inform their practice, in the same way that they can seek technical guidance in workshops such as print-making and photography to feed into their art-making.

The book’s Q&A format also prevents it from simply being a ‘manual of art course comparison’. The ambition of the book lies beyond just comparing these different dynamics of art education by also reflecting on these courses against the background of art education in the UK generally.

In the years after the financial crisis of 2008, the Art and Humanities education sector suffered greatly in terms of receiving reduced government funding. One of the shared experiences of most colleges was the lost of funding which affected institutions and students. For the latter, the situation had worsened by 2012, when tuition fees went up to £9,000 per year.

然而,在他看來,在金史密斯學院不把藝術史課程囊括在純藝術教育中的最重要原因,是不想給學生的好奇心、想像力和實驗性帶來任何限制。所以要不要學藝術史可以由學生們自己根據需求決定,正如同他們可以選擇是否向學校裡的技術人員和各種類型的工作室尋求幫助和支持一樣。

這本書的問答形式確保了書中內容不僅僅只是一本‘藝術院校比較指南’,作者的目標不僅僅是把不同的藝術教育風格囊括在一本出版物中,而且也試圖以深度對話的形式去尋找歸納不同風格教育中所經歷的共同性。

在金融危機發生後,英國的藝術和人文教育學科在政府的預算資金支持上受到最大的沖擊。受訪的眾多課程主任都反映到,資金緊張是學校和學生共同面對的情況。對於本地學生而言,情況似乎更糟:在2012年,大多數的藝術院校把學費拔高到了每年9000英鎊。


<<< 1 2 3 4 >>>