Kathryn Gorr

ARTE 302
Delacruz
2/2/2010 Gude Synopsis

Gude promotes an experiential, broad yet deep, multicultural, flexible, fun, collaborative, contextual,
and relevant curriculum as the foundation for postmodern art education.

The elements and principles are a part of many standards in art education. Even though most art
educators (I hope) reject the idea that there is a strict set of requirements or any sort of formula for
creating art, those same teachers are lost as to what to do in the classroom if not teaching those rules
and standards. Gude seems to have taken a step back and looks at what art is and how it functions in
society as a basis for building a new framework for a new curriculum.

Art is not a specimen that is examined in a gallery. It is not separate from our lives. While some art is a
decoration and other art is intentionally uncomfortable to look at, all of it is in dialogue with our lived
experience. As a society, we agree upon standards of beauty and collectively agree on the meanings of
images and signs. Based on consumer trends and societal concerns, we as a group determine what art
makes it onto the market and into museums.

Gude stresses the role of the arts and art education as an avenue for creating individual and collective
meanings, understanding the self and others, and understanding our roles in a democratic society. I
understand this as such: When we study art, we explore different media for representing our
perceptions of the world. We also look at how other people represent their perceptions and begin to
understand the differences and similarities between our individual experience and the experience of
others. Through the study of art, we become aware of others and ourselves. By breaking down,
changing, and reconstructing the different modes of creating meaning in art, we influence the collective
meanings of things. We impact society through our interaction with and responses to art.

I was reminded of an essay by Chinua Achebe titled The Truth of Fiction. He describes fiction as a
necessity to ease man through life. This is not meant to imply that fiction is always a happy escape from
the struggle of everyday living. What Achebe ultimately is getting at is that fictions enable us to
experience that which we would have never otherwise experienced. By immersing ourselves in the
perceptions of others, we see what they see and experience what they experience. We learn to
empathize with and understand other people.

With this understanding of the function of the arts, how do we teach our students to participate in the
dialogue between art and society? Gude suggests that the curriculum be collaborative with input from
the students and the teacher as to the content of the course. This allows for all parties to find interest in
the material and makes the lessons relevant. Also, if art is a tool for understanding other people, the art
class should include artworks from a diverse range of cultures, backgrounds and media. When
incorporating multicultural references for talking about and making art, teachers need to go in depth
into the context in which the work was made. That context is necessary not just for understanding
where an image or practice came from but more importantly what informs the visual language being
used. The use of diverse references exemplifies to students that with universal similarities within the
human experience, there are also very different norms and standards for reading images depending on
the culture that an artwork comes from.

At this point, I am stuck. I still cannot see Gude’s classroom. I understand the content and emphasis on
paper, in theory, but I, like many other teachers, don’t see what that looks like in practice. Is it that we
are afraid to neglect the kind of education that we received, one founded on false elements and
principles? Or is it just that a structural revolution has yet to arrive that can accommodate our new
philosophies?