At the turn of the 19th century and into the 20th century, the study of the fine arts was believed to have a positive correlation with both moral and social improvement. According to Stankiewicz (2001), visual art was linked with manners and morals through instruction in aesthetics, art history, and art appreciation” (p. 106). People believed that through the exposure to works of art and the study of pictures that students’ manners and morals could be redefined ad the collegiate and secondary school level. Thus, “teachers and advocates of object teaching hung pictures in classrooms to inspire good behavior and used them in lessons about objects that could not be carried into school” (Stankiewicz, 2001, p. 115).
Theorists such as Mark Hopkins and Reverend Joseph Torrey believed that it was a moral obligation to provide programs and courses that taught aesthetics and their philosophical approach leading to both social and moral improvement. “Art history lectures and texts intended for secondary student and teachers-in-training brought aesthetic didacticism—that is, the belief that art can teach the right behavior—into the twentieth century” (p. 112). Thus, through the concept of aesthetic didactism coined in the 19th century, the education system had evolved and promoted the fine arts. It was believed at the time that “aesthetic didactism laid an ideological foundation for courses in aesthetics, art history, and art appreciation in colleges and secondary schools” (Stankiewicz, 2001, p. 107). Thus, at the turn of the twentieth century, the study of pictures to aid in aesthetic didactism was added to the curriculum within elementary and secondary classrooms.
Building on the foundation laid by both Mark Hopkins and Reverend Joseph Torrey were three key figures in history of American art education. The three individuals that promoted aesthetic didactism were: Charles Eliot Norton, Manuel Barkan, and Estelle May Hurll. These key figures believed that it was important to educate and allow college students, adolescents, and children in art history through the method of picture study.. Each of their scholarly work and publications played an integral role in making aesthetic didactism and picture study a global phenomenon and immortalizing the art movement.
Art educator and historian, Charles Eliot Norton believed that the modern times of the 19th and 20th century comprised of a time where there was a low-intellectual quality and moral decline of the modern men. Whilst a Professor at Harvard University, Norton introduced an art history program to Harvard. According to Stankiewicz (2001), “Norton’s Art History program had three goals: 1) to explain how the fine arts expressed the moral and intellectual conditions of past cultures; 2) to demonstrate how the barren American experience started the creative spirit; and 3) to refine the sensibilities of Harvard men” (p. 110). Elliot believed that adding picture study to the fine arts curriculum would have a positive cultural affect upon the American values and intelligence. Elliot believe that “by study fine arts, teachers and students learned to value European artistic traditions and to construct one version of common ideals and homogenous culture that [he] had found missing from the United States” (Stankiewicz, 2001, p. 112).
Art educator and theorist, Manuel Barkan sought to find ways to counter the effects of the Great Depression for his students through his methods, and theories of Art Education. According to Stankiewicz (2001), Manuel Barkan has been “generally regarded as a leader in reconceptualizing art education to synthesize the knowledge in art of the artist, and the knowledge about art of the aesthetician, the critic, and the historian” (p. 114). Barkan’s 1951 publication, A Foundational for Art Education sought to establish a discipline-based art education. Along with establishing revolutionary ideas for within the field of Art Eduction, Barkan believed that was necessary to spending time “preparing teachers . . . [to] recognize the impact of economic and social conditions” (Stankiewicz, 2001, p. 114).
Estelle May Hurll is considered to be one, if not, the most prolific picture study author. Hurll publications: Child Life in Art, Riverside Art Series, How to Show Pictures to Children were used as guidance for educators, parents, theorists, and art historians to establish a consistent language, and developmental process to picture study. Through Estelle May Hurll’s writings, educators began to realize the possibilities that pictures brought to their classroom and curriculum. According to Stankiewicz (2001), through her writings Hurll “encourage[ed] teachers to not forget that the aim of picture study was enjoyment and beauty” (p. 117).
Personal Reflection
The development of picture study brought a universal language to the fine arts—along with providing a more global view and understanding of the world around them. I truly believe that the studying of art history builds and develops character, and still today plays an important role in the development of the mind, body, and spirit of our students. The powerful impression that art leaves on the child should affect both their moral judgement and social interactions. I have found a positive correlation between the number of art experiences—whether studio experience, museum, art history course, or an art appreciation course—and their approach to positively impacting the community around them. Art teaches us to accept, be open-minded, and understand there are more approaches to solving an obstacle than one.
Alike, the development of the internet helped aid in providing immediate global knowledge and interaction with pictures, museums, art, and artifacts. According to Stankiewcz (2001), there were “dramatic changes in access to images made possible by computers and the internet have parallels with the rise of printed imagery and the distribution of periodicals in the last half of the nineteenth century” (p. 114). The rise in both printed imagery and digital imagery only continues to promote access for both teachers and students to become globally-conscious in the art world. However, I feel that as the internet has continued to develop that the purpose has not changed from that of educational and access, to that of entertainment and more often, non-educational; thus, it is most-important now than ever-before to educate our students how to properly use the internet as a resource, a tool, and a method to develop as a morally sound and globally intelligent character.
References
Stankiewicz, M. A. (2001). Aesthetic Culture of Pupils. In M. A. Stankiewicz, Roots of Art Education Practice (pp. 104-125). Worcester, MA: Davis Publications.
Comments