Art Schools - What innovative programs are not stuck in the ways of RISD, SAIC, Parsons, etc?

College Majors Visual Arts and Film Majors
21

Thanks for additional info, sorry for any misunderstanding I had been in this thread & another & mixed up convos (too much multi-tasking) adding info about our visit to Laguna & CalArts & talking about concept art/illustration also…

Kid is actually pretty well versed in the industry and eyes are fairly wide open in terms of expectations. But I support him pursuing this and figuring out more while he’s at college & expect things may change/evolve (this isn’t our first rodeo…I have a BFA, teach in an art department and his older sister is at RISD).

Altho I disagree a little re location in that it makes sense to take into account a schools’ location and their ties into the jobs a student wants to co-op, intern and eventually work in. One can get a great BFA anywhere, but it makes sense to see how location impacts employment (and general fit for the student too). Ringling has a great rep so employment comes to them anyhow. My kid doesn’t want to go to FL for more personal/political reasons.

22

I am not clear on what your son wants. Does he want a more classical course in drawing, painting, sculpture, ceramics, illustration etc. or is he most interested in digital arts and technology? I know that they intersect but what is his desired focus?

For technology would this interest him: UCSD’s ICAM http://musicweb.ucsd.edu/ugrad/ugrad-pages.php?i=103
or Dartmouth http://digitalarts.cs.dartmouth.edu/

The programs below are in music depts., and often involve interdisclinary installation work. Would he avoid these as well? (Since he is multi-faceted and also is a musician, do interdisciplinary opportunites appeal to him?)

Oberlin TIMARA http://www.timara.oberlin.edu/
Brown MEME https://www.brown.edu/academics/music/graduate/computer-music-multimedia-memes

Being in school provides teachers, connections and most of all resources for doing the work. With funding in the shape it is in in this country, artists of many kinds often now stay in school through the doctoral level to keep these things, along with whatever aid or stipend they can get. This is true of music and dance at any rate.

An academic environment also allows for the kinds of experimentation that would not survive in the marketplace.

If your son is not planning on grad work, I can understand the focus on the marketplace and career. But if he is thinking about more schooling, undergrad is still foundational and I wonder is he would enjoy trying some of the more conceptual work without the pressure of selling work or getting a job.

Or does he just hate it :slight_smile:

23

ArtAngst–“My kid doesn’t want to go to FL for more personal/political reasons.”

LOL–In some locations the worry will be art with no time for politics.
But it is what you make of it to be sure.

24

@gouf78 I’m assuming you’re meaning this in a lighthearted manner, but the sad fact is the convos I’m having with fellow parents in my geographic area about location and college searches now are centering around some pretty hefty issues that include our children’s ethnicity, religion, women’s issues, gender fluidity and/or transgender issues…so for a lot of us location has become much more than just ‘ugh it’s too hot’ and more about what are the state policies and how can they possibly impact my child for the next four years at this college during this current federal administration.

My parent friends and I are all aware that art schools in particular are going to be generally more liberal and welcoming to a more diverse population, but we’re paying a lot more attention to local and state politics surrounding the colleges being looked at.

25

I am interested in the original post here and have been thinking about it. I have some random thoughts.

My kid is a composer and I stumbled onto this thread because the title interested me. There are many intersections among the arts these days and my kid often mixes visual arts and music (PhD program). Performance art pieces are very popular right now in music as well, and very “conceptual.” My kid does not do these pieces, but appreciates them.

Some random thoughts from a different universe:

One basic question. Do art students and parents actually expect teachers to teach art-making? That might sound like a stupid question but at no time, ever, at any level, has my kid (or me) expected a teacher to teach her to compose. I mean that in the most basic sense.

Being in an environment that does not honor what you are doing is not uncommon for creative people. Sometimes the creative opposition strengthens resolve.

I think there is a disconnect between those who want to study art to make a living after undergrad and those who are interested in staying under the academic umbrella to push the envelope creatively, which often means less commercial appeal, and can be considered, really, a form of research. At some point, of course, making a living is an issue: stipends tend to be stingy.

The effect of the latter often trickles back down to undergrad, since the profs and TA’s are in that world.

Personally I find it all exciting, installations, conceptual art, electroacoustic music, you name it. I don’t find it retro at all though I do know something about the history. For one thing, technology continues to develop and affects many of these creations and performances.

I do find it annoying when a work is created just to do something new that has never been done before. If the motivation is internal, rather than external, I think it tends to be good honest work.

If digital arts and a career using them are the focus for a student, then there are schools for that, right?

26

compmom - Thanks for the thoughtful response… A few thoughts of my own…

In visual arts, there are skills to be learned - specific skills. Think of those skills like the music skills required in music programs - every music student must study and perform. Music students (even composing students in my experience) must learn to play and show skill at their instrument/voice.

Art programs do not require skills - nor do most even begin to attempt to teach them. For example, we ran into someone who has an MFA in visual arts from SAIC…and they didn’t know how to gesso a canvas to prepare it for painting. (It’s pretty simple - buy gesso, apply to canvas, ensure you have the right coating).

That’s, well, simply incredulous. But it also reflects how academia has become obsessed with training students to describe intellectual theories about what they’re doing - at the expense of them actually doing art that’s interesting.

In music, I’ve been fascinated that much (most?) of the great composing following up on classical music is happening in film scores. There’s some fantastic work going on - like the score for Game of Thrones… Interesting, compelling, deep, complex, rich, and braiding together a wide range of traditions.

So what about digital arts? You ask: “If digital arts and a career using them are the focus for a student, then there are schools for that, right?”

First, we have to decide what we mean by digital arts. Is it the technical training to support it? Is it the ability to express oneself by creating outstanding visuals that are digitally produced and/or presented? Most schools are lost in the ozone among these. Or trying to create ethereal “new media” works.

From my search… No. There are not schools for digital arts. Oh, every art school will speak loudly about their program. But as we’ve dug into them, they’re shallow and not really deeply involved with creating and presenting art with digital media.

27

@atlascentaur I find it so weird when art programs do not require skills. We visited an Animation program and they do not require a portfolio. :-? This college (which my daughter loved) goes by SAT and grades basically. Because of the way admissions is set up, a great test taker who has good grades but no artistic skill can win a spot in their program :-? We spoke to some staff and they’ve been trying to get the admissions dept to add portfolio into the their admissions requirement. I really don’t understand this.

28

Are there schools for digital arts? Actually there appear to be quite a few. Or purport to be.
Our in-state university offers a digital arts degree. Sounds like an interesting mix of tech work. You are admitted as a sophomore and it requires portfolio for admission to the program.

Good art programs require portfolio because they don’t really “teach” art from ground zero. They DO require skills. They do enhance the skill level of the artist based on their talent and will teach new skills built on what students already knew coming in.
(The “gesso” example is just sad…but that is ground zero skills–seems like the student needed to wake up)

Quite a few programs will admit students into the college (based on SATs and grades) and have them take pre-reqs but then require portfolios for admission into a specific art program after a couple years (like my example above). There is no guarantee of admission into the major. It does give a student opportunity to build a portfolio but it also seems like a student has to go through admissions twice.
( it’s a bit like trying to get into a professional school after undergrad work or going into a direct admit program from the start)

29

“I do find it annoying when a work is created just to do something new that has never been done before.”

I don’t. You never know where something totally new will lead you. It’s like a new invention waiting to be the solution for some yet unknown problem.

30

“One basic question. Do art students and parents actually expect teachers to teach art-making?”

Don’t know. But a program requiring portfolio dodges this question by refusing admission to those who don’t already have a certain level of talent. And it’s expensive. If you want to “learn art” most people would sign up for a course or two just to test the waters.
Similar to auditions required for musical groups. I doubt you sign up to be a music major and expect the instructor to teach you the notes on the staff.

31

@gouf78 I get what you’re saying about them having to take prerequisites becfore admission to the major but the school we visited wasn’t this way. The kids did not need any artistic abilities just good test scores and GPA. That is all they needed to gain admissions into the animation program (major). That I found weird

32

The Savannah College of Art and Design exists to prepare talented students for professional careers, emphasizing learning through individual attention in a positively oriented university environment. – scad.edu

33

Well, it’s not weird if the main goal is money for the college.

34

@gouf78 true

35

I imagine there is a parallel between art school and conservatory versus college BA programs in terms of admissions requirements, meaning portfolio or audition in the case of instrumentalists for the more intense BFA/BM art or music degree, but not for the general college art or music major.

Many composers do not play instruments as undergrads, or sing. In fact one criterion my kid has was that that not be a requirement. They do learn theory and history.

I misspoke, or rather miswrote, about being annoyed by works done just for the sake of being new. Of course I enjoy works that push envelopes or are entirely original. But some awful things are done too, just because they haven’t been done before. The composition world I am familiar with is more avant-garde though still in the realm of classical (“new music”) and some of the work almost qualifies as research, and is often very interesting. But there are only so many sounds you can get out of the bottom of a cello or blowing into a flute.

To be honest, film scoring is about as far away as the world of “new music” and exploration in composing as you can get, at least in many instances.

Performative pieces are really big right now in new music, and I can see a parallel with the conceptual curricula you describe. Some of it I like, some of it I don’t, but for young artists, there are so many possibilities and the artistic freedom to work toward finding a “voice” seems to be a good thing.

I think undergrad should be foundational but not sure anymore what that really means!!

36

As a musician who also procures quite a bit of music, the incredible richness of scores is very compelling - where the innovation involves combining influences and threads from many flavors of music. That takes exceptional skill and jnventiveness.

The more intellectualized music I find among “modern composers” also includes innovation - but the final result is generally pretty obscure - elite.

We all get to prefer what we prefer. But I’m voting with the scores. :slight_smile:

37

I have two daughters, one an art major and one a music (vocal performance) major. Both had pre-requisite skills in the majors they picked when they applied for their programs. They both went to NYU and had to either audition or prepare a portfolio. In both cases, admissions was based on both talent and skill (as well as 50% academics.) Both girls needed to show the traditional skills they learned in high school-- ie., well rendered realistic drawings and arias/ classic MT pieces sung with good technique. But both departments were looking to see if there was more–talent that would go beyond a set of skills. They were looking for heart, emotion, a strong voice and a strong story to communicate whether it be through song or artwork. They were looking for someone who was able to channel their emotions and thoughts into their art in their own unique way. Yes, that first year in college laid the ground work for technique in “foundation” courses, but that was not the only or main emphasis. Marketability was not the basis for work. Passion, intellectual and emotional pursuit was. My daughter’s art was not all conceptual, but there did need to be meaning behind all of it. A lot of conceptual art is skill based. It is misleading to say that art is one or the other. I think the main issue is that there are many people who can re-create realistic art and who can sing on key and hit the right notes. But the real artists are the ones who add more to their art–whether it is realistic, or not. And that is where talent lies.

38

Here’s good grist for the mill of this discussion. College Confidential won’t let me post a direct link - it’s a WordPress page. But this is a really good read on a blog - a read about the essential conflict between the assumptions of a modern university (modern being the last few hundred years) and their poor fit with art, art training and artistic practice.

So… Find it by searching “The Impossibility of Painting Skillz”. You want the blog “The Impossibility of Painting” and the entry entitled “Skillz Part 2”.

Highly encourage parents of potential art students to read this.

39

Sorry, but without getting political, if you take art education back hundreds of years ago when it was all about learning “realistic” skills, you are going back to a time of male (and only male) artists painting or sculpting religious icons or being patrons of the wealthy who wanted someone to capture their images (in the most flattering yet “realistic” way possible) so their portraits can be hung and saved for the ages in their manor homes.

40

I’d suggest reading the blog more carefully. Right now we’re fighting the extreme of “skill free” art education - wher writing about art is far more important than art itself. And were most art students don’t want a life making art but a life writing academic articles, curating, or teaching. It’s pretty upside down.

There is tremendous skill required to make abstract art, modern art, surrealism, good post-modern art… Look at the work of Cai Guo-Qiang. Incredibly contemporary but also made with superb focus on quality making (with fireworks and gunpowder). And he is based in skills from watching his father make more classical art in China.

A discussion of skill is NOT a look backward - but a look forwards. Art is no different from any other field - skills are the only foundation on which a future can be built.

I get incredibly bothered that people presume a black/white: It’s either stuffy old-style realism or complete skill-less free for all.

Fortunately, the world is far more complex - and far more interesting. Great, innovative jazz musicians were exceptionally skilled - just often not classically trained. (and classical training tends to kill jazz innovation and improvisational ability). But there are many levels of skills.

For example, I have a friend who mixes his own pigments. He has learned all the techniques, mediums, pigments, and approaches. But his art isn’t stuffy - it’s pretty radical.