Summer is an excellent time to review topics covered before and evaluate whether they should be raised again. Four years ago I offered a preliminary overview of a way of discussing the benefits of the arts. The subject keeps coming up in conference presentations and workshops so I thought it would be appropriate to revisit it now and to add a brief update at the end. Here is a passage from my 2013 post Benefits of the Arts: Those for whom art … [Read more...]
Fifth Anniversary Highlights: Art for Art’s Sake?
During the month of August, Engaging Matters is republishing some of the most widely read articles from the five years this blog has been in existence. Several times I have suggested it’s necessary to understand that some of our internal, somewhat coded language is off-putting to the world beyond our inner circles. “Arts for arts sake” is one example. Art for Art’s Sake? There’s No Such Thing (from early in 2012 and copied below) attempts to … [Read more...]
AfAS Follow Up
“Art for art’s sake” is a concept that always generates discussion and passion. My last post (Art for Art’s Sake Revisited) was no exception. My good friend Andrew Taylor took me to task both for things I said and for some he assumed I did. (See his comments following the post.) He forced me to refine the intent of that post and in the process several things were clarified for me. There are two points I was trying to make. First and by far the … [Read more...]
Art for Art’s Sake Revisited
One of my most widely read (and/or infamous) posts is Art for Art's Sake: There's No Such Thing. The thrust of that essay was that art always does something and is always for someone and so the concept of art for art's sake, while it is an acknowledgement of the power of art is, taken at face value, a meaningless and perhaps unhelpful concept. Before I go on let me reiterate that I am wholly in sympathy with the phrase's intent of celebrating the … [Read more...]
Benefits of the Arts Follow-Up
A commenter on Benefits of the Arts asked a great question: observing the similarities between the Rand Corporation’s Gifts of the Muse intrinsic/instrumental categories, wasn't my core/ancillary division simply a re-naming? (And Ian David Moss's later comment was in a similar vein.) Here was my semi-immediate response: While the whole concept is still baking, I’d say no on two grounds. First, the rationale for the core/ancillary distinction is … [Read more...]
Benefits of the Arts
One of the best things about blogging (especially in the summer when so many of my colleagues in academia are paying less attention) is the opportunity to experiment with ideas that are, shall we say, not fully baked. Careful (and long-time) readers of this blog may recall that in my post Art for Art's Sake? There's No Such Thing, I expressed some discomfort with the notions of intrinsic and instrumental benefits of the arts. That construct … [Read more...]
The Locus of Value
It's an amazing thing to be the parent of an adult child, read something they have written, and say, "Wow! That's brilliant." My son, John Borwick, is an IT consultant for the higher ed world. He is also a blogger who recently wrote about MOOC's, Massive Online Open Courses. The whole thing is a fascinating consideration of the good and the bad of the concept. I'll say a bit more about that later, but the thing that convinced me to include a … [Read more...]
Valuing Public Good
In preparing my last post [Structures and Models in Blogs, Oh My] about the recent discussions of structural and business models for arts organizations, I was gradually overcome with an uncomfortable sensation. The argument that the intrinsic benefits of the arts are undermined by the need to serve the public scares me. When (and how) did furthering the public good become a bad thing? Before I go any further, let me acknowledge that I'm … [Read more...]