May I comment briefly on the very
thoughtful article by Jere Abrams and
Jackson Lears which appeared in The
Cavalier Daily for Wednesday, May 14?
My colleagues and I read with dismay the
remarks of the students at the close of last
semester in Art 1A. We immediately
resolved that, insofar as we could manage,
criticisms of this sort would never again be
justified. In Art 2A, the second semester of
the course, dates and other factual information
have been reduced to an absolute
minimum. The emphasis has been placed
where it belongs, on the quality of the
individual works of art and on the broad
patterns of historical development. This
change brought about a striking increase in
student enrollment and student attention.
In 1969-70 more radical changes will take
place. The two lectures weekly, reduced to
fifty minutes each, will be supplemented by
discussion sections taught by graduate
assistants, under the general guidance of the
lecturers for each section of the course. In
these sections students will be invited to
explore ideas related to the lectures, ask
questions, argue, make new observations
and proposals. The discussion sections will
be as lively and as valuable as the attitudes
brought to them by all concerned. They
should go a long way toward providing the
continuity and the personal participation
the course still urgently needs.
On the other hand, my colleagues, both
the creative artists and the art historians,
feel that not all the faults lie with us,
particularly in the advanced courses. We
have much more to give than some students
are willing to accept. It is not encouraging
to see vacant seats in the classrooms or the
department library - until just before
examinations. Art, both practice and history,
is a means for intellectual and spiritual
enrichment, not merely for the attainment
of grades.
