Arts education a question of democracy between different worlds and imaginaries

Introduction[1]

When we analyzed the public policies related to Arts Education in Portugal we can identified three major modes of thought that have characterized the discourses and practices of arts education in schools: (a) utility spaces (the integral training of children, artists training,  public training); (b) sense of marginality in relation to other forms of education (there are no policies for arts education) and (c) too much past, translated in the sense of marginalization and criticism on the role of the state and over-expressed in the future importance of the arts in the education of future citizens. The excesses of the past and the future have not contributed, and do not contribute, to the development of new understandings in relation arts, education, society and culture.

In this context it’s important to look for arts education, look to school, with a certain attitude of resistance to the prevailing logic of conceptualizing education and public school promoting other frameworks for the development of educational and artistic work to contribute for the choice of paths, always contingent and unpredictable, which are adapted to different contexts, expectations and developments of children, young people and adults, schools and community settings.

So, my intervention on this conference, has as a starting point  the following question: “what kind of characteristics I identify in arts education that can contribute not only to build a more participatory, cultured and cosmopolitan citizenship but also, in this way, contribute to the reconfiguration and another thinking of school?”. I will try to answer this question through three sets of ideas, "arts education is an ambiguous and paradoxical territory which does not form artists"; "arts education lies at the confluence and conviviality between different worlds" and "the centrality of arts education is based on the creation of what is unknown, of what does not exist, yet".

Ideas that result, on the one hand, from the analysis of the most innovative experiences that exist in Portugal and, secondly, the need to look in another way for this training area in the context of both local and global contemporary society, characterized by the existence of multiple and contradictory worlds. These ideas are presented as poles in finding another way at these issues, not in defense of the importance of the arts in education, but arguing that the arts are forms of knowledge and interpretation of the real and imaginary worlds, are modalities which, in addition to entertainment, contribute to the challenged, to create problems and questions that are beyond the purely rational dimension. On other hand, these ideas are organized around the tension between Education and Art “equating, on the one hand, the importance of artistic expression for the development of the child [young people and adults], and, on the other hand, while areas of knowledge and autonomous culture, with its own specificity [...] This idea It leads us to defend the existence of an artistic culture which treatment should be object, in creative and dynamic ways, of study in our schools [...]. It is in this tension between education and art that we can find the ways to walk together in the coming years" (Nóvoa, 1987, p. 23).

 

Arts education is an ambiguous and paradoxical territory which does not form artists

The first idea is that “Arts education is an ambiguous and paradoxical territory”. Ambiguities related with the political level and the characteristics of this type of education and training.

In the first case, political level, "in a society that boasts the importance to the arts and culture, arts education occupies an ambiguous position. Politicians of all
quadrants display it as flag without ever agreeing on the means necessary to its development. The education system, including it always in the compulsory program, frequently reduces it to a subordinate position" (Beaulieu, 1993a: 16).

In the second case, characteristics of this type of education and training, the ambiguity results from the tension between the fields where it is located: education and the arts. This tension is one of the factors that contribute to the existence of a number of paradoxes that enhance these ambiguities.

The first paradox is manifested within the school system, where "school tends to translate the artistic experience in terms of content, knowledge and techniques geared to one purpose: the training."  However, if we can teach the techniques, history, or the analysis of the works, artistic education, in any plan that carries, form people do not form artists. And this, seeming a jargon, is structuring and questioning of what is still dominant in terms of training.

The second paradox, as in education in general, is that the "encounter with art" can not only be provided by teachers, by the schools since this “encounter” cannot take place without the mobilization and utilization resources outside the school, artists or cultural organizations.

The third paradox, is manifested in the confrontation between the "academic certification" and "artistic certification", both relevant, but not always matching with the requirements of the "art market".

The fourth paradox is based on the political dimension taking into account that arts education bases its legitimacy on a democratic conviction: "art is a good of all and therefore must be accessible to all." The State responsibilities under these policies as they are practiced in three distinct spheres, education, arts and culture, and they are "not based on the same modes of action or presuppose the same challenges" (Ibid: 17).

In these complex and ambiguous relationships between the demands "universal education” and the “unique experiences of art”, that "resists being caged in artistic disciplines, administrative barriers and territorial boundaries, making himself heard across cultures and societies" (Interarts, 1999), artistic education plays a role in what Bamford (2006) refers as "the wow factor". That is, "the enthusiasm and the unexpected results, hardly definitive, but which have a huge impact on teachers and even in communities where it happens (p. 18). Thus, "to qualify the artistic experience is so powerful that it cannot always be planned in terms of prescriptive learning outcomes, nor measured in tests, as so often expect in more formal educational settings. That is the nature of the creative act - the divergence, the 'inexplicable unreal" (Durrant, 2003: 82).

 

Arts education is situated at the confluence and conviviality between different worlds, real and imaginary

The second idea is that “Arts education is situated at the confluence and conviviality between different worlds real and imaginary”, and this confluence and conviviality between different worlds featuring arts education emerges from three
essential aspects.

The first is that this kind of education and schools are among the art world, culture and the world of education.

The art worlds are, in the words of Howard Becker (1984) intersections networks, dependencies and interdependencies, in which individual and collective activities involving a wide range of subjects, actions and meanings, expectations, needs and constraints, the views of artist, the role of art in society, the role of art in society in education, public consumption and the different reference contexts, both nationally and internationally. It is this network that enables the creation, appropriation and dissemination of the artwork.

On the other hand, within the performing arts, for example (cf. Vessilier-Ressi, 1995), teaching and learning, only makes sense in triangulation between training, creativity, enjoyment and production in the context of realization and practice presentation of different artistic achievements that have different modes of underlying communicability and various public since these differ in terms of interest and binding to a particular shape and artistic genre in a "eclectic mixture of aesthetic codes"(Pais 1995: 133).

The second observation relates to the formative work situated between artistic and educational subjectivities. Indeed, art education, any artistic school is by its nature rich in contradictions and paradoxical situations (Duve, 1992 Michaud, 1992 Vasconcelos, 1999). On the one hand, it is based on the principles of art and education that are build a set of rules, rules that are in constant disequilibrium through the use of the imagination, the emotions and feelings that artistic practices mobilize. On the other, arts education requires from students opposite qualities. Alongside the technical field, the use of rules, conventions and standard procedures, the student should be able to build its difference and originality (Menger, 1996). Should be able to integrate the society of their time, develop certain skills, with differentiated and often contradictory features.

The third observation is related with the fact that the training role is situated between the conventions and individuals. In fact, the arts, as social and human construction, as culture and form of knowledge (Martí, 2000), are shaped by different socializing contexts. The "building artistic senses" depend on the ownership of certain procedures, techniques and aesthetics according to the universes of reference. Changing these sociocultural universes the meanings and artistic cultures change too.

Indeed, the different forms of expression, creation and artistic achievement they have underlying a set of conventions, with multiple character, a dynamic between permanence and change, between tradition and innovation, a dialectic between the "territory of training" and "territory of the individual" (with their talent, their vocation, their strategies and singularities - Duve, 1992; Menger, 1996; Moulin, 1997). The way the bridges are established either by an uncritical assimilation, partnership or confrontation, is another of the key aspects of how the individual projects himself in the present and in the future.

For example, to learn to play an instrument, composing or playing in public, beyond the purely technical aspect and an artistic rationality, what is at stake is that the Beethoven's universe is different from Chopin's universe, Bach's universe is different from Haendel, the universe of Kwella culture is different from the universe of Suffi music and so on, and that the public move, also, in different worlds. In this plurality of differences (with their own codes and conventions) school and education play an important role in ways that contribute to the settlement of differences and the construction of singularities detecting and elucidating the points of divergence and, at same time, the points of convergence (Kartomi and Blum, 1994), as demonstrating, for example, the cellist Yo-Yo Ma among the universe of Bach's suites and the work of Piranezi from XVIII sec.

And in this "being between" the metaphor of the border helps us to create intelligibility between the subjectivities involved, areas of convergence and divergence, the conquest of new boundaries. Three aspects characterize this border territory: the inquietude and risk, tradition and originality, limits and transgressions.

Inquietude and risk

Living in a border territory means the necessity to reinvent almost everything. The memories and the experiential knowledge of individuals, and/or of the collective, are modified when applied in different contexts "(...) an availability to wait for anyone. It means the necessity to pay attention to all who come with their different habits and recognize the differences as opportunities for mutual enrichment "(Santos, 2000: 324).

Living in a border territory is also living in uncertainty and unease. The city to build (Boltansky & Thevenot, 1991) is part of a projection of desire in relation to the future, by providing frameworks close to the persons, close to the geographies and times, based on "dialogue and in a culture of closeness and inclusive basis."

Tradition and originality

The experience of living in a border territory means to live in a suspension space "in time between times" as stated Santos (2000). Unpredictable situations subvert the plans and pre-existing forecasts. The memories and traditions are reconfigured by the need to overcome the dilemmas between the known and the unknown, between playing old models or replace them. The assumption of tradition is reconfigured in order to find aspects of memories and traditions that are significant to the individual, to the collective and to perform certain artistic work, according to the communicational situations and contexts, in an interrelationship between heritage, originality and change.

Limits and transgressions

The border territory, while social and cultural spaces, is based on the limits and in the transgression of these limits. Stability-innovation-instability-stability are some of the stages that characterize the complexity and precariousness of the "border sociability" (Santos, 2000). As stated Becker (1984) "in general, breaking the existing conventions and its manifestations in the social structure (...) increase the problems to the artists and disbelieve the circulation of their work, but at the same time, increases their freedom choice of unconventional alternatives (...) "(p. 34).

 

Centrality of arts education in the creation of what is not yet known, what does not exist, yet

If we think education as transformation, "this means that there is a dynamic relationship that carries a fundamental tension situated between what is already known and the way to something that we don’t know very well, what will be, which is not yet fully appropriate by the individual. And if this can cause some initial discomfort, and causes, the arts and arts education, in particular the performing arts, can be an important tool in developing this creative tension between what is and what is not, particularly, in the development of new individual and collective imaginaries (Vasconcelos, 2013).

In fact, in my opinion, one of the main functions of arts education is to activate the resources of the imaginary and creativity and, in particular, encourage modes of resistance from the closing and uncritical reproduction of models in terms of organizational and educational-artistic modes, in order to develop the desire and pleasure for challenge, for the risk of the unknown.

Antonio Pinho Vargas, 2001, portuguese composer, refers to the act of composing as "a complex process, one being launched in which arise things, to the forces which responds in some way. This being-open to the becoming inherent in the creative process (...) does not exclude the historical consciousness of so-called material (each composer will have in a very different way). From this conception  emerges keywords like: process; complexity; be-open for the future; historical consciousness; materials; differentiation; individuality; unpredictability; restlessness; challenge; risk; discipline; order; disorder, that featuring the creative act.

The "creation of what is not known, what is new," also involves emotional intelligence in each one needs to feel the challenge, the desire to (re) reconcile the unknown with the system of codes and existing conventions within their reference frameworks. However, "when we speak about imagination we are in the field of contestation [...] in the anchorages of one here and one there, an inner and an outer" in a plural geometry and "astonishing (which amazes, that surprises)" (Tavares , 2013: 32-33) open to the random and to the unknown through "extended rationality" (Jiménez, 2005: 162) based on multiple options.

Thus, art education and education for creativity unfolds in a complex framework, goes through a comprehensive and interdependent set of situations and "strategic encounters" that "comprise a creative collision of individual, ideas and actions" (Burnard, 2012a ).

This strategic and interactive encounter has three types of implications. The first involves thinking student, child, youth and adult, as a individual who builds his own speech and his authorial condition facing different kinds of conflictualities enabling the development of personal and artistic thinking in convergence and / or divergence with pre-existents aesthetic and technical models.

The second implication, is necessary to attempt that community art practices are plural, diversified, open fields of possibilities in creation of bridges between different worlds, encouraging the "trial of the ideas through improvisation, the collaborative work and discussion" opening to the territories of "collaborative approaches that connect people, disciplines and genres" projecting ways to enable "new points of comparison and starting", learning environments "that connect tradition and innovation" (Gregory, 2005: 20-21).

The third implies the necessity to recognize the multifaceted perspective of the creative process, often with advances and setbacks, changes of direction witch synthetically involves: (a) “promoting the imagination", means" the initial combustion engine of something, the moment of apparent immobility when, inside […] ideas are formed: some fighting the others” (Tavares, 2013: 384); (b) "exploration and experimentation" in which different ways are sought and adapting to the ideas, processes, objects, techniques are pursued and accommodated; (c) ‘moving from that which is imagined to making what is imagined’ creating "new things", new ideas or reconfigured ideas in the world, multiplying the "real possibilities of analogies, explanations, links" (Ibid: 385); (d) ‘moving from that which is imagined to making what is imagined’ that confronts others in a complex relationship between different modes and conditions of perception.

Conclusions

All the considerations presented, they have underlying a concept of artistic education and schools simultaneously existing and imagined. Thought schools as spaces that allow the construction freedom and familiarity not hegemonic between different worlds, skills, knowledges and practices. Freedom and familiarity not free from conflict but also from convergences.

The references that we have today in relation to this kind of education and teaching are historically and culturally constructed, based on a particular representation of what is art, the artists, teaching and learning, confronted between the romantic-classical tradition paradigms, functionalist paradigms and pressure of globalization and cultural industries in particular related with the standardization of taste and the media visibility of the great achievements. Neoliberal policies and the traditional canons do not value the schools as "symbolic and ambiguous territories", as "useless space" as "laboratories of knowledge and culture" that enhance the imagination and encounters with others, with knowledge in a "dialogic" confrontation in which exist the valorization of the policy of artistic education as "symbolic and ambiguous territories", in "the experiencing of new journeys and itineraries, living across borders and contact zones" (Novoa, 2002), in an interpersonal networks and collaborative creativities  mobilizing concepts of different geographies, living together with multiple voices and senses, reflecting the different artistic personal universes, that contribute to a new discourse and democratic artistic and educational action, not hegemonic and emancipatory. That contributes to a citizenship and a school more participatory and cosmopolitan.

And in this citizenship and school more participatory and cosmopolitan, work the imagination presents itself as one of the relevant dimensions. As the Gonçalo Tavares, portuguese writer states, and I will end in a provocative way, "The imagination, the ability to produce mental images of things that are not immediately in front of the eyes, is an unusual human capacity unfortunately, it is often undervalued, and almost attacked in the educational process. In fact, the phrases: - pay attention!, you have your head in the moon !, etc. are repressive expressions that show how the school is constantly saying: do not imagine, see!. As if what is shown is always more important and relevant than what is imagined. A parallel school, almost utopian, too, would be one in which teachers sometimes say, today you're not enough on the moon! Or: do not be so attentive, dressed, what I'm showing to you! Or, to put another way, not so extreme, more realistic: the school should give to see, get to know, only what enhances the imagination. I'll show you something that will allow you later the possibility to imagine many other things. Images that feed the imagination and that don’t decrease. Replace definitions by imaginings- this could be a motto; contestable, of course, but that could allow, perhaps, a discussion and a shift of mental educational space" (Gonçalo M. Tavares, Público 8 de janeiro de 2016, p. 5).

---

[1] Working paper presented at  2016 European Teacher Educational Network Conference, Setúbal, 15 April.