An introduction, I suppose.

Hi. Well, this will be my first post on Blogger. I decided to start a new blog here, for whatever reason. What to talk about? I'm so glad you asked! Monday will be the beginning of my 6th week at Art School. I guess that's exciting? Not really... I thought I would enjoy it more.. Though I think it is moreso to do with the fact that this University technically was not my first choice and if I had my way, it wouldn't have even made it as a fall back....The course is too generic and at the same time, has too narrow a focus. Everything we are learning at the moment (and apparently, for the 3-year duration of the degree) is contemporary art, etc. Don't get me wrong, I quite like it, however I don't think it's right that an art school should only focus on one art style or period, however you wish to put it.. Especially when the examples we are shown and the work we are expected to create fits, for the most part, into the generic, contrived-looking 'contemporary' art styles.

In one of my classes; Visual Inquiry, we have been doing a lot of 'expressive markmaking' and abstraction, etc. I actually enjoy this, however so far it is all we have been doing and after a while it really does get boring- particularly when we are not even being taught any form of technique or given any constructive advice.. Now, I like the freedom of being able to do what I want to do, however this is supposed to be a structured course and seeing as all we are supposed to be doing is reflective upon the topic, I think we should be given a bit more direction, rather than being thrown into it without explanation. I say this, because I seem to have come across a lot of people in my course who don't understand exactly what we are meant to be doing, seeing as we have been doing the exact same thing for 5 weeks with instructors/tutors who just prance around the room glancing at what you are doing, giving no feedback whatsoever. Seeing as we are being graded on this and how it matches the criteria (which so far, no one seems to know what it is), I'm a little confused as to what the point is of having instructors who don't give any useful feedback.

On a similar note, students who I have spoken to who seem to carry a similar viewpoint have asked their instructor/tutor (whatever you wish to call them) this question, "Is this all we are going to be doing in this course?" (as in, are we only going to be drawing random lines and circles which are meant to be an abstract representation of an actual physical object, an emotion or mood which we aren't given any stimulus to try to emulate). The reply was "If you want to study fine arts, you're in the wrong place". Quite blunt and to the point.. Why can't they give feedback or input like this? (Why can't they give input at all?) Well, that's handy, seeing as this is the only art school in this state. Also, I remember being taught this, time and time again, by my highschool art teachers (who were, you know, useful!) , and indeed by studying other artists....To be able to abstract a figure, you must first know how to draw that same figure realistically...So that you can gain an understanding of how it can be abstracted... Why aren't we learning this? All the artists we have been told to research for this course have done this... I don't see how it relates, really- I mean, studying artists who began as realists and used this to abstract their later works, when all we are doing vaguely fits abstraction.

Before I began this course, I asked myself "What is the difference between a Bachelor of Visual Arts and a Bachelor of Fine Arts". I just assumed that this University chose to call it Visual Arts.... Now the difference has come and slapped me in the face- so to speak. Don't get me wrong, I don't like art classes in which we are required to draw and paint a bowl of fruit and get the lighting and shadows so dramatically correct, etc etc..(although that does teach you technique...) I like art in which I can do what I want, at least for the most part.. Being school, usually one is somewhat restricted with what one can do.. But with this course, I don't like the fact that we are being taught only one way of doing things... It just comes across to me as a sort of stuck up "we're a contemporary art school, this is all you can do here"..... I don't get it- I mean I get it...But I don't get why I should put up with this. The first contemporary artists were on to something, I agree with that. But 80% of those who followed were and are trying too hard to fit that niche. I don't know where I am going with this post, really. I guess I'm just saying, I don't like this art school very much....The theory course is directed toward contemporary art, my other practical course is the same. Why are we only being taught this narrow-minded perspective? To me..that is the opposite of what art should be.. I think we should be allowed to express what we wish to express in the way we wish to express it, in any art form we wish. And, in terms of 'school', be taught and shown different art forms and artists who expressed various things in different ways. I know this is only first year art school, and with any course, first year never gives much freedom in that sense... But as I mentioned previously, the whole, entire course and degree is tapered toward the contemporary arts....and that is not what I wish to graduate with. I'm not benefiting from this course whatsoever. I've even considered dropping out...But that would leave me with too much free time... I don't know what I'll do....Time will tell.