Art Education in the High School—Can We Face the Present?

Yale Epstein
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00043249.1968.10793808
1967-12-01
Art Journal
Abstract:Since the “old days” of abstract expressionism and action painting, serious art critics have been de-emphasizing the role of the prematurely aging “Elements and Principles” of art as the basis for their criticism. Along with this de-emphasis has come the acknowledgement that the newer art forms are being created by a generation of men and women who were nurtured on Dewey, Read, Kepes, Moholy-Nagy, Lowry, Bell etc. and who now look upon their former mentors as mere academic synthesizers of words, logic, psychology, philosophy and optics. The traditional approaches to the creation and appreciation of art have been too thoroughly digested to attract the current generation of artists. In fact, many of the creative struggles of these artists emanate from their rejection of the “Elements and Principles” which were gospel in their youth, and the subsequent search for more meaningful guides for artistic expression. (Oddly enough, however, there is apparent contradiction in that some of these new guides take on the trappings of the pre-Modern Art era. As an important contemporary artist recently said in discussing her painting in which a rock like structure appeared to protrude forcefully from the background of the canvas, “For a while it took more guts for me to model that form realistically than it did for Franz Kline to slash color on his canvases a few years ago.” It is beginning to be acceptable, even fashionable for some artists to show that they can draw in the “traditional” sense.)
What problem does this paper attempt to address?