fascination
Site Moderator
as with most things...I am not sure this is an either/or proposition...the greatest societies see the necessity for both
The arts aren't important
- Thread starter awaitingxxpeace
- Start date
Angel HI
Well-Known Member
Yes. There are so many arguments that can come out of the last 2 posts, but suffice it to say that you are correct, and that it is a shame that the US will never be one of those societies regardless of what it thinks it is.
Peaches
Well-Known Member
Gotta say, I completely agree with DOI on this one.
Yes, I firmly believe that the arts are vitally important to society. Yes, I definitely feel they should be supported, both in though education curricula and through government sponsorship of the arts (grant funding, tax exempt status, and so forth).
However, in terms of a hierarchy of needs...I'd much rather see people fed, clothed, and housed--either directly or through other means of economic stimulation--than be educated about/exposed to the fine arts. Just my $0.02. Yes, I realize that there is an effect wrt those artists who are economically affected by such a decision; I don't have an argument against that.
Specifically wrt schools and children, however, I question the relative funding for the arts, compared with the funding for sports. IME, sports funding is rarely, if ever, cut while fine arts funding is the absolute first to go. THAT makes me livid.
Yes, I firmly believe that the arts are vitally important to society. Yes, I definitely feel they should be supported, both in though education curricula and through government sponsorship of the arts (grant funding, tax exempt status, and so forth).
However, in terms of a hierarchy of needs...I'd much rather see people fed, clothed, and housed--either directly or through other means of economic stimulation--than be educated about/exposed to the fine arts. Just my $0.02. Yes, I realize that there is an effect wrt those artists who are economically affected by such a decision; I don't have an argument against that.
Specifically wrt schools and children, however, I question the relative funding for the arts, compared with the funding for sports. IME, sports funding is rarely, if ever, cut while fine arts funding is the absolute first to go. THAT makes me livid.
madmaximus
Forum Master
ART CREATES JOBS (lots of them).
It powers innovation and invention.
It is simply staggering to me how prodigiously naive and profoundly narrow-minded it is to think that the influence of art is confined to a painting of a nude--and the appreciation thereof.
If we are to argue Science and Mathematics, then AT LEAST we must get a broader view of the argument.
ART IS THE MANIFESTATION OF IMAGINATION:
Science and Mathematics are the SLAVES of ART.
They are MERELY the tools that implement such imagination.
But M, you say, let's be real! How does art help?
How is practical art pertinent to the economy?
Well then,
Guess what is the most important currency in Venture Capital?
Hint? It is NOT MONEY (that's linear thinking BTW).
It is NEW IDEAS (which, of course, power Innovation and Invention)
And guess what powers new ideas?
Yep, imagination.
And how do we train a collective group to imagine?
Yes...we can say it: Training in the ARTS
So, what does that have to do with JOBS? and Money?
Linear thinking espoused by science and mathematics imposes profound limitations.
(Our inability to look at things holistically stems from such linear thinking--and prodigiously promoted in science and mathematics because we don't either have, care, nor get exposed to the artistic component that allows us (nay, TRAINS us!) to examine things as a whole).
That is why linear thinking has a difficult time appreciating the fact that ART drives a significant part of modern economy.
That is why it is difficult to appreciate that every year the economy benefits IN THE TRILLIONS from ARTISTIC TRAINING in the form of NEW releases of dresses, shoes, neckties, new ways to package pies, food, records, software, movies, and a virtual sea of consumer goods.
You see, before that movie, dvd, iPod, Mac, necktie, blouse, shoes, etc... came into being, SOMEBODY had to imagine it.
Sure, somebody had to build it and engineer it, but those people wouldn't be employed if somebody didn't come up with the idea, would they?
Lastly...My pet peeve.
Look at what linear thinking's gotten us to: Next quarter profit strategies, instead of long-term gain.
Harvest the seas, the Amazon forest--and destroy the environment.
What's art got to do with solving that?
Imagination--the ability to work outside the framework of linear thinking and find better ways of doing things.
Ever wonder why the greatest civilizations produced great art?
It is because building greatness requires a congruence of great collective imagination.
So that question, about choosing between hiring an art teacher or hiring a math teacher?
I vote for the Art Teacher ANY TIME.
M
It powers innovation and invention.
It is simply staggering to me how prodigiously naive and profoundly narrow-minded it is to think that the influence of art is confined to a painting of a nude--and the appreciation thereof.
If we are to argue Science and Mathematics, then AT LEAST we must get a broader view of the argument.
ART IS THE MANIFESTATION OF IMAGINATION:
Science and Mathematics are the SLAVES of ART.
They are MERELY the tools that implement such imagination.
But M, you say, let's be real! How does art help?
How is practical art pertinent to the economy?
Well then,
Guess what is the most important currency in Venture Capital?
Hint? It is NOT MONEY (that's linear thinking BTW).
It is NEW IDEAS (which, of course, power Innovation and Invention)
And guess what powers new ideas?
Yep, imagination.
And how do we train a collective group to imagine?
Yes...we can say it: Training in the ARTS
So, what does that have to do with JOBS? and Money?
Linear thinking espoused by science and mathematics imposes profound limitations.
(Our inability to look at things holistically stems from such linear thinking--and prodigiously promoted in science and mathematics because we don't either have, care, nor get exposed to the artistic component that allows us (nay, TRAINS us!) to examine things as a whole).
That is why linear thinking has a difficult time appreciating the fact that ART drives a significant part of modern economy.
That is why it is difficult to appreciate that every year the economy benefits IN THE TRILLIONS from ARTISTIC TRAINING in the form of NEW releases of dresses, shoes, neckties, new ways to package pies, food, records, software, movies, and a virtual sea of consumer goods.
You see, before that movie, dvd, iPod, Mac, necktie, blouse, shoes, etc... came into being, SOMEBODY had to imagine it.
Sure, somebody had to build it and engineer it, but those people wouldn't be employed if somebody didn't come up with the idea, would they?
Lastly...My pet peeve.
Look at what linear thinking's gotten us to: Next quarter profit strategies, instead of long-term gain.
Harvest the seas, the Amazon forest--and destroy the environment.
What's art got to do with solving that?
Imagination--the ability to work outside the framework of linear thinking and find better ways of doing things.
Ever wonder why the greatest civilizations produced great art?
It is because building greatness requires a congruence of great collective imagination.
So that question, about choosing between hiring an art teacher or hiring a math teacher?
I vote for the Art Teacher ANY TIME.
M
fascination
Site Moderator
trying to thing of something to say that won't be staggeringly gushing....I simply bow to your wisdom and concur wholeheartedly
fascination
Site Moderator
yea well, I am married to an engineer---and trust me--- his skills aren't gettin' me off of the island 
...then again, I might not want to get off of the island if he was there
...then again, I might not want to get off of the island if he was there
Nybz
New Member
This is an adorable statement
I've been lurking for a while, but I have very strong feelings on this subject, particularly arts in education. Here goes my rant
It really bothers me to think that with government budget cuts education always takes a huge blow. Education develops our future. It's interesting what that reveals about our values as a society. I've seen entire elementary schools closed, middle schools consolidated, and university department cuts where I live.
Regarding the university level, I attend a large urban public school (40,000 students). Our business and engineering departments in particular have been graduating students that cannot write or communicate at a college level. The university hired a special tutoring staff for the business department. Someone might argue that these departments bring money into the school, but they faculty turns out machines that don't have any communication or analytic thinking skills. This is probably the only reason that the university hasn't made larger cuts to the English (my dept) and humanities departments. The English sector is so short on funding that faculty members look for grants in other departments, and the undergraduate literary journal receives no financial support from our own department.
Also, the importance of arts programs in schools isn't necessarily to create artists, but rather to foster creativity. For a scientist to make a groundbreaking discovery, they must think creatively, not in linear terms. Great thinkers in the sciences and technologies have the greatest creative capacities amongst their peers. Regarding doctors-- students who perform the best in medical school and onward are typically the ones that score the highest on the verbal portions of their tests. My friends studying medicine who score at the top of their class and will undoubtedly succeed, have strong backgrounds in music, art, literature, etc. Doctors must also know how to deal with real human beings.
The sciences are inherently creative and humanistic in their real applications. We communicate through language (most often narratives) and visuals in every field, and only creativity leads to innovation and real improvements. If anyone has been through a public high school lately, science and math curricula typically don't encourage creativity. Instead, those classes educate students out of the creativity that they will need in the future.
As a student of literature, I realize how ridiculous some of our abstract discussions of aesthetic theory might sound (and sometimes are). I do believe in the creative nature of arts, the communal nature of arts, and the ethical benefits of the arts. I also know that communities which value the arts along with the sciences, appear to foster not only the most innovation, but the most understanding amongst individuals. Beyond literature, arts unlike other academic disciplines educate the entire body, especially dance. One might connect this to our health problems in the United States.
I've grown up with both science and art (I studied engineering in high school). Regarding funding outside of schools, most of my dance education growing up has been at local community/recreation centers. While I've focused on literature (my field), I believe this discussion can be easily applied to visual and performing arts.
I'll stop there, but to supplement my rant, please watch this lecture by Sir Ken Robinson about creativity in education : www. youtube.com/watch?v=iG9CE55wbtY
He specifically mentions dance in education, and the educative hierarchies.
It really bothers me to think that with government budget cuts education always takes a huge blow. Education develops our future. It's interesting what that reveals about our values as a society. I've seen entire elementary schools closed, middle schools consolidated, and university department cuts where I live.
Regarding the university level, I attend a large urban public school (40,000 students). Our business and engineering departments in particular have been graduating students that cannot write or communicate at a college level. The university hired a special tutoring staff for the business department. Someone might argue that these departments bring money into the school, but they faculty turns out machines that don't have any communication or analytic thinking skills. This is probably the only reason that the university hasn't made larger cuts to the English (my dept) and humanities departments. The English sector is so short on funding that faculty members look for grants in other departments, and the undergraduate literary journal receives no financial support from our own department.
Also, the importance of arts programs in schools isn't necessarily to create artists, but rather to foster creativity. For a scientist to make a groundbreaking discovery, they must think creatively, not in linear terms. Great thinkers in the sciences and technologies have the greatest creative capacities amongst their peers. Regarding doctors-- students who perform the best in medical school and onward are typically the ones that score the highest on the verbal portions of their tests. My friends studying medicine who score at the top of their class and will undoubtedly succeed, have strong backgrounds in music, art, literature, etc. Doctors must also know how to deal with real human beings.
The sciences are inherently creative and humanistic in their real applications. We communicate through language (most often narratives) and visuals in every field, and only creativity leads to innovation and real improvements. If anyone has been through a public high school lately, science and math curricula typically don't encourage creativity. Instead, those classes educate students out of the creativity that they will need in the future.
As a student of literature, I realize how ridiculous some of our abstract discussions of aesthetic theory might sound (and sometimes are). I do believe in the creative nature of arts, the communal nature of arts, and the ethical benefits of the arts. I also know that communities which value the arts along with the sciences, appear to foster not only the most innovation, but the most understanding amongst individuals. Beyond literature, arts unlike other academic disciplines educate the entire body, especially dance. One might connect this to our health problems in the United States.
I've grown up with both science and art (I studied engineering in high school). Regarding funding outside of schools, most of my dance education growing up has been at local community/recreation centers. While I've focused on literature (my field), I believe this discussion can be easily applied to visual and performing arts.
I'll stop there, but to supplement my rant, please watch this lecture by Sir Ken Robinson about creativity in education : www. youtube.com/watch?v=iG9CE55wbtY
He specifically mentions dance in education, and the educative hierarchies.
fascination
Site Moderator
thanks so much and welcome to DF
SDsalsaguy
Administrator
Ditto; welcome! ...and hoping you'll participate more and lurk less!
madmaximus
Forum Master
Joe
Forum Master
I wouldn't rely on any of them.