Exploration 6: Teaching

“Divers”ifying My Curriculum
Exploring Diversity Assumptions, Bringing Awareness,
Breaking down Barriers, and Empowering Change
in Art History Instruction

Stereotypes, Lorna Simpson

“The way we see things is affected by what we know or what we believe. We never look at just one thing; we are always looking at the relation between things and ourselves. Our vision is continually active, continually moving, continually holding things in a circle around itself, constituting what is present to us as we are.”

– John Berger, Ways of Seeing (1973)

Bringing diversity awareness into my virtual classroom requires an acknowledgement and understanding of these statements by John Berger. The act of seeing (which precedes spoken language) “establishes our place in the surrounding world” and it is this visual acuity that leads to further exploration of that world, encourages us to ask questions and explore the possibilities of what we are seeing on a deeper plane.  Just as we can only see what we look at, we can only begin to make sense of what we see through the lens of our own experiences. Providing the appropriate platform and encouraging students to approach the art we study and “see” it through this lens of personal experience, enables a dialogue to ensue that reveals belief systems and “start[s] a process of questioning” (Berger 1973, p 5) these accepted systems. Rather than creating a “unit” on diversity to teach in my class, Exploration 6 is an assessment of the content of my course for opportunities to bring diversity awareness into the discussion and examination of methods by which to establish interactions that promote the fleshing out of the belief systems students bring to their interpretative viewing experiences.

Survey of Art I & II are courses that emphasize a Western and Eurocentric perspective of art history. The images selected for the course were created within that perspective and while the art of the course exhibits influence from cultures all around the globe (i.e. Matisse and Picasso shared a fascination for African tribal art, just as Whistler was enamored with the Orient), the predominant lens through which the art is interpreted is Western. The selection of paintings offers a “comprehensive” overview of the history of art. However, within this overview, several groups are under represented based on gender, race, sexual orientation, and ability. Often those who do appear in the text are omitted in the actual teaching of the course due to time and “importance.” Of the images, I have selected for consideration in this exploration many were not included in the course content although they appear in the required text.  I have selected images that are created by and “representative” of different genders, sexual orientations, race, ethnicity, ability, socioeconomic status, and bodies.

The primary objectives in these courses assert that upon completion students will be able to

•       Identify significant artworks, their artists, locations and the historical periods to which they belong.

•       Define important terms related to art and art history.

•       Analyze works of art stylistically and relate them to the society in which they developed.

•       Recognize stylistic changes in art by comparing and contrasting artworks from different historical periods.

The current means by which students are to accomplish these objectives include listening to lectures on the subjects, reading the text, participating in discussion boards that expand and challenge a student’s thinking on the subject, writing comparative essays and taking assessments of the material. 

Many of my students never really look at the art we are studying. They simply interact with it in terms of title, artist, medium, period, and significance. The more interesting or seductive the piece, the more likely they are to remember or engage with it. However, this way of looking and seeing is temporary and offers little incentive to engage with other pieces of art outside of this course. This practice also denies them the opportunity to evaluate themselves and their own ways of thinking in their viewing experience.  Berger asks the questions: “to whom does the meaning of the art of the past properly belong? To those who can apply it to their own lives, or to a cultural hierarchy of relic specialists?” (Berger, 32).  Berger is referring to how the (mass) reproduction of images and their availability to people operating outside of the “art world” influences how meaning is formed around a piece of art. Taking a closer look at the “meanings” that are derived from looking is the center of this exploration.

In their work on engaging visual culture, Karen Keifer-Boyd and Jane Maitland-Gholson discuss images as “cultural meaning systems” (Keifer-Boyd and Gholson 2007, xvii).  Their research reveals three critical observations of these systems:

·      Meanings derived from images are built on both past and current interpretations of images.

·      Meanings absorbed from images are part of the present, since they refer to what we know at this moment.

·      Meanings we make from visual information are foundational to future understandings.  (Keifer-Boyd & Gholson 2007, xvii)

Although works of art (or visual culture) can articulate time, place, space, culture, and intent to the viewer, they are mute objects that require interpretation from the viewer. However, a viewer lacking knowledge of the piece, its history or the culture within which it was created can only draw from her own knowledge to draw meaning within the piece. As students explore art, utilizing both their personal experiences and the inherent information offered by a piece, they begin to discover the cultural, social, political, and personal context within which their meanings are shaped. The responses generated from this looking process illustrate how “meanings of objects are derived from a continuum of memories” (Boyd, Amburgy, & Knight 2007, p. 20) and support the idea that “memory is never objective and fixed; rather it is subjective and fluid” (Boyd, Amburgy, & Knight 2007, p. 20).

“The significance of visual culture for art education rests not so much in the object or image but in the processes or practices used to investigate how images are situated in social contexts of power and privilege.”

(Keifer-Boyd & Gholson 2007, xviii)

In order to begin a dialogue that illuminates these preconceived ideas and “assumed truths,” I will engage students in cooperative conversations about each of the selected pieces prior to discussing the work or works “in class.” Although the discussions will take place (ideally) before the image in introduced within the course context this is not necessary. Students will be encouraged toward personal interpretation outside of a factual or popular interpretive/historical narrative. Through the act of questioning and listening, I will look for assumptions about gender, race, ability, sexual orientation, etc. and will revisit the discussions to decode language and look for missed readings of the work to inform further discussion. The initial questions are derived from the VTS (Visual Thinking Strategies) approach to viewing art. These questions include simple open-ended questions such as: “What is going on in this piece?” “What do you see that makes you say that?” “What else do you see?” While these probes seem simple, they are meant to allow the discussion to flow from the viewer’s own viewing style rather than a traditional art historical perspective. Students are exploring and filling in the gaps themselves, rather than looking to the instructor for meaning. Follow up questions will follow the lead of those participating in the discussion and attempt to decode the assumptions behind the responses from the students. Some of these may include: “Imagine this was a [white, black, homosexual, disabled, able bodied,] [man, woman, transgender]. How (do you think you) would respond to this piece? What (do you think) makes you say that?” 

Below are a few of the selected images that will be used to explore difference and start the conversation of diversity. “Difference” exists in many forms: gender, race, age, intellect, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, religion, physical appearance, character traits, professions, cultures, and personal preferences. Each of these differences denotes a way in which we are like or not like another person. People use these differences to assess themselves and others, as well as determine what is valuable and desirable and what is not. Unfortunately, these ideas of difference are cultural constructions rather than natural progressions of the process of the examination of self and other (Jhally 2009). As in most cultures attempting to assign categories for understanding various groups within and without, these constructions assign an image of “normal” that both alienates and deprives those who do not fit within these categories.

Venus de Milo (Aphrodite of Milos)  & Alison Lapper (Pregnant), by Marc Quinn

George Washington, by Jean-Antoine Houdon & Jean-Baptiste Belley by Girodet-Trioson

Satan Devouring one of his children, Francisco de Goya & Ophelia, Millais
Two Fridas, Frida Kahlo & Insane Woman, Gericault

Branded, Jenny Saville & Nude Self-Portrait, Egon Schiele
Self-Portrait, Robert Mapplethorpe & Self-Portrait, Modersohn-Becker

Witches Sabbath, Hans Baldung Grien & Les Demoiselles d'Avignon, Picasso

In the TedTalk Inclusion, Exclusion, Illusion and Collusion, Helen Turnbull discusses the "blindspots" or unconscious biases that we have when we view those around us. Dr. Marylin Sanders Mobley supports the need to identify these biases with her declaration that "what we cannot acknowledge, we cannot address." Identification of these biases can occur through this process of looking and decoding the language we use toward certain images and how that language changes if aspects of the image change (gender, race, etc). As students articulate their interpretations of the images, they reveal codes of thinking, ideologies, and beliefs about themselves, individuals, and groups of people, both like them and unlike them. As they identify or distance themselves from the image (i.e. using language such as "they" or "us" to distinguish between inclusion and exclusion from a group), they imply what they know in that moment of looking. The questioning process evokes thought, reflection and opens up dialogue for change. Likewise, this form of conversation provides students with a platform to defend and challenge their existing belief system as they continue the process of self discovery.

 “Before a society can change its behaviors, beliefs must evolve through a self-reflective process. Looking at and articulating beliefs about the visual images that surround them can help students to develop explicit processes for thinking through beliefs and the behaviors that rise from those beliefs” (Keifer-Boyd & Gholson 2007, xviii).

"There is no such things as the innocent eye. We are not always seeing as clearly as we think we are. The brain distorts the reflection and if it's distorting the reflection of ourselves, what is it doing in terms of your reflections or patterns of other people?"

 - Helen Turnbull, Inclusion, Exclusion, Illusion and Collusion, 2013

Resources: 

Berger, J. (1973). Ways of seeing. London: British Broadcasting.

Burnham, R., & Kee, E. (2011). Teaching in the art museum: Interpretation as experience. Los Angeles: J. Paul Getty Museum.

Dewey, J. (1934). Art as experience. New York: Minton, Balch & Company.

Keifer-Boyd, K., Amburgy, P., & Knight, W. (2007). Unpacking Privilege: Memory, Culture, Gender, Race, and Power in Visual Culture. Art Education, 60(3), 19-24

Keifer-Boyd, K., & Gholson, J. (2007). Engaging visual culture. Worchester, Mass.: Davis Publications.

Perkins, D. (1994). The intelligent eye: Learning to think by looking at art. Santa Monica, CA: Getty Center for Education in the Arts.

Rice, D., & Yenawine, P. (n.d.). A Conversation On Object-Centered Learning In Art Museums. Curator: The Museum Journal, 289-301.

Dr. Marylin Sanders Mobley, The Paradox of Diversity, 2013

Helen Turnbull, Inclusion, Exclusion, Illusion and Collusion, 2013

The Codes of Gender: Identity and Performance in Pop Culture 2009, 73 min. http://pennstate.kanopystreaming.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/node/41623

List of Works Selected from the course selected to

Explore Diversity Assumptions, Bring Awareness, Breakdown Barriers, and Empower Change:

Introduction//Module 1:

Venus de Milo

Alison Lapper, Pregnant, Mike Quinn

Module 2: Art of the Northern Renaissance

Arnolfini Portrait, Jan van Eyck

Deposition, Rogier van der Weyden

Virgin and Child, Jean Fouquet

Module 3: Art of the Early Renaissance (Italy)

Donatello, David

Boticelli, Birth of Venus

Module 4: Art of the High Renaissance and Mannerism

Michelangelo, David

*Bologna, Abduction of the Sabine Women

Module 5: Art of 16th Century Northern Europe and Spain

*Hans Baldung Grien, Witches Sabbath

*Levina Teerlinc, Elizabeth I as a Princess

Module 6: Art of the Southern Baroque

Artemisia Gentileschi, Judith Slaying Hologernes

Diego Valazquez, Las Mininas

Module 7: Art of the Northern Baroque

Judith Lester, Self-Portrait

*Louis Le Nain, Family of Country People

Module 8: Art of the Rococo and Neoclassicism

Jean Honore Fragonard, The Swing

*Adelaide Labille-Guiard, Self-Portrait with Two Pupils

Jean-Antoine Houdon, George Washington

*Horatio Greenough, George Washington

Module 9: Art of the 19^th Century I

*Girodet-Trioson, Jean-Baptiste Belley

Ingres, Grande Odalisque

Gericault, Insane Woman

Goya, The Third of May & Satan Devouring One of His Children

Courbet, The Stone Breakers

Eakins, The Gross Clinic

*Henry Ossawa Tanner, The Thankful Poor

John Everett Millais, Ophelia

Module 10: Art of the 19^th Century II

Manet, A Bar at the Folies-Bergere

Mary Cassatt, The Bath

Gaughin, Where do we come from? What are we? Where are We Going?

Rousseau, Sleeping Gypsy

Munch, The Scream

Rodin, Walking Man

Module 11: Art of the Early 20^th Century

Derain, The Dance

Nolde, Saint Mary of Egypt Among Sinners

*Egon Schiele, Nude Self-Portrait

*Modersohn-Becker, Self-Portrait

Picasso, Les Demoiselles d’Avignon

*Frida Kahlo, The Two Fridas

Module 12: Art Since 1945

Willem de Kooning, Woman I

Roy Lichtenstein,  Hopeless

Audrey Flack, Marilyn

Duane Hansen, Supermarket Shopper

Cindy Sherman, Untitled Film Still #35

Lorna Simpson, Stereotypes

*Robert Mapplethorpe, Self-Portrait

*Jenny Saville, Branded

*Leon Golub, Mercenaries IV