• Monday, May 28, 2012

Previous

Next

Syracuse President Urges Reimagining of Arts’ Role in Colleges

May 6, 2011, 1:26 pm

Nancy Cantor at ArtsEngine (photo by A.C.K.)

By Alexander C. Kafka

ANN ARBOR, MICH.

Syracuse University Chancellor Nancy Cantor Friday urged universities to foster a “blending and interplay between” traditional arts paradigms, and to approach inevitable administrative tensions over the arts in a more inclusive, less judgmental manner.

Cantor, who served previously as Michigan provost and chancellor of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, made the remarks on the final morning of the three-day ArtsEngine conference at the University of Michigan. (Arts & Academe reported on the conference Wednesday and Thursday too.)

Cantor said universities mix three paradigms: stand-alone arts programs like schools of music or dance; interdisciplinary collaborations like film students working with counterparts in schools of public affairs on social-issue documentaries; and public collections and productions like museums and theaters.

She urged a more imaginative, vigorous approach to imbuing academic life with artistic vision. For instance, in architectural projects, students in various disciplines can counter-weight lofty visionary impulses with practical, structural, entrepreneurial, disability, environmental, and other considerations.

Or, Cantor said, the arts can be wrapped into a thematic exploration across campus, with theater directors and other university presenters working with scholars to interweave artistic offerings with academic focuses. “Cry for Peace: Voices From the Congo,” for example, stemmed from ethnographic research on immigrants into a Syracuse theater project, and resonated with a human-rights film festival, she said.

Junctions between curricular and co-curricular projects can also be powerful, Cantor said, citing Syracuse’s “Canary Project,” which has produced various artwork and media on global warming.

And the arts provide universities with excellent ways of connecting with and bettering their communities, she said, pointing to university-sponsored public art, youth outreach through photography, a Black History Preservation Project, and other activities in Syracuse.

For all that, though, Cantor said universities should expect arts to sometimes have a disruptive impact on academe, and to cause tensions along the boundaries between disciplines, and between curricular and extracurricular demands and offerings. How should students and faculty working amid or between disciplines be judged, and by whom? How much should core disciplinary skills be emphasized in work that combines more than one of them? How immersed in a particular art form should the arts journalist be, for instance; and how technologically savvy should the performing artist be?

To reduce those tensions, said Cantor, requires “a certain generosity on the part of domain experts,” “a strongly democratic, inclusive form of engagement,” and “a suspension of judgment.” Academe is not always characterized, she said, by such generosity, inclusiveness, and suspended judgment.

In measuring the value of artistic pursuits in higher education, Cantor  recommends considering their “scale, impact, and longevity,” the aesthetic equivalent of civil infrastructure. She urged educators to create an environment mixing “top-down seeding” and “bottom-up contagion” of a university’s artistic imagination. The result, she said, will be artistic efforts that are simultaneously “disruptive” in prompting a questioning of assumptions, and calming in galvanizing a campus to embrace change and possibility.

In other words, the university will feel art’s power, Cantor said, quoting a phrase Susan Sontag used about the camera, as “the ideal arm of consciousness.”

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

  • Print
  • Comment
  • ronn0044

    Quoting anonymous commenters on other publications’ stories? Nice journalism there, CHE!

  • minnesotan

    They can afford roller coasters, but not fair wages for their employees? Sounds reasonable.

  • sand6432

    I was not a legacy admit at Princeton (my father went to Columbia, to which I did not apply), nor was I a recruited athlete (though i won a varsity letter anyway), but I have no objection to those attributes being given some weight in the process of admissions, so long as all applicants meet a threshold level of academic achievement and there are not systematic patterns of athletes, e.g., having SAT scores well below the average for the class. Universities have good reasons to want to encourage family loyalty to their institutions, entirely apart from whether annual giving is increased or not, just as they have good reasons for wanting to field teams that can do well in intercollegiate athletics. And what about the low-income students who become alumni themselves and then would like their children to attend their alma mater? Why should they be denied the chance to have their loyalty to an institution they admire given some preference in admission of their children?—Sandy Thatcher

  • darccity

    Not what they are saying. Legacy admits bypass the regular admission process. The 10% are legacy admissions. Before all these changes, one-third to half of highly-selective colleges were preferential admissions. Thus, when a college says it has a 12% acceptance rate, they are excluding the athletic, legacy, celebrity, kids of big donors, transfers, and politically connected. They are in a completely different pool. Granted, legacies may have only a 33% chance of acceptance, but that still is a lot better than their odds would be in the regular pool.

    In addition, legacies have a huge mostly adverse impact on campus culture far in excess of their actual numbers. They tend to have instant access to the organizations, institutions and traditions of the college. Places like Cornell, Duke, Dartmouth, and Princeton are dominated by legacies: the social life and the networking.

  • darccity

    On the surface that sounds like a reasonable proposition. And they certainly are at big state universities where networks of grads use a degree from state U. as a brand name for hiring. But if top-rated college alums want to maximize the lifetime value of their sheepskin, they should insist their alma maters stop diluting admission classes with jocks and mediocre legacies, as ivies still do. Enormous preferences for legacies and coach-selected star athletes is what we are discussing here, NOT athletes or legacies with high SATs and high school averages. Ironically, alumni with less motivated, lower achieving kids may discover that combined family income and wealth do better under no-exceptions admission standards, even if those result in their own teens being rejected!

  • iangoski

    When the time comes that legacy applicants can view their legacy status as a motivation to excel beyond the normal limits of what might be expected, then the privilege of legacy status will have finally met the challenge that it legitimately should have recognized several generations ago.

  • schultzjc

    Gee, interdisciplinarity as the way forward! How novel!

  • 22122488

    Even the hard sciences can benefit so much from a creative and ongoing partnership with the Arts. In some universities, science departments host Artists in Residence for one year. (I know for sure that some British universities have been doing this for some time now.) These artists learn as much as they can and express that in an artistic way. In more and more universities we witness a healthy dialogue and all sort of collaboration between scientists, engineers and artists. The communication of many aspects of science, can be enriched with artistic expressions let those be paintings, films, photographs, music or drama. In one of my recent talks I pointed out that the artists through their art can be (and they have been) important architects of social change. Often their art has benefited science indirectly. Artists can be agents of change regarding things like environmental issues, AIDS, Nutrition and global warming. Their art can convince millions about the urgency of some of these issues and do so more convincingly than 1000 scientific papers.
    Art can also inspire the minds of the public about the awe we all experience in recent discoveries. Teaching physics at an Arts college enabled me to see this great potential of art and hence I assign my students one extra semester long project. The artistic expression of any aspect of science or its impact on humanity or the environment. After all our mission statement suggests that these students will one day “Author (through their art) the culture of their times.” PPColumbia College Chicago

  • paievoli

    The arts are a necessity, very simple no discussion. However they are not the only form of creativity or creative thinking. Jobs refers to his art courses in college as the ones that gave him a unique perspective on how to develop and run his business. Stanford commencement speech 2005?
    The question is can this form of thought – true creativity – be fostered in environments that typically do not base themselves on “creativity’? This IMHO is the focus here? How do other majors use this premise properly and openly.
    Think of athletes taking ballet to learn to be more graceful – a very simple example. Now take that example and apply it to the thought process. Entrepreneurs? Yep.
    I recently took a problem situation and through business logic hopefully have produced a very creative solution. It was a big problem that basically had a simple solution. OPM – other people’s money. Entrepreneurship – creativity.
    Everyone so far is very happy. Yes I went to school to be an artist and I came out a well rounded person. Actually a little too well – rounded.

  • 11134078

    Yes, but where do Beethoven and Rembrandt come in?

  • painter33

    Beethoven and Rembrandt are ignored because they smack of that old elitist idea that one needs to develop real skills and conceptual understanding if one is to become a visual practitioner of a single discipline, e.g. a painter. Drawing, for example, is now made easy for everyone by non-judgmental approaches that are ever-inclusive and bereft of the criticism that might hurt someone’s feelings or damage their self-esteem, which, of course, genuine criticism does not. Offering a drawing class (of no more than 15-18 students) and making the poor dears actually be accountable for basic (observational) drawing principles is sooo pass
    é and just doesn’t allow for interdisciplinary partnerships with, oh say, fluid dynamics or Early Midlothian Poetry. In the university setting, individual studio disciplines aren’t sexy enough; I suppose they would like everyone to be a dilettante “artist(e)” and not painters, sculptors, etc. – the people who are described by the work that they do. “Artists” are usually self-described poseurs that are what they are only because they say they are. Painting and sculpture students are those dirty kids who’ll get paint and plaster dust all over the nice furniture in other departments, so they’re not invited.
    Everyone wants art but few are willing to pay for it.

  • gsudduth

    Interdisciplinary doesn’t EVEN want to hear from MFA artists; after being riffed I haven’t gotten much more than a ‘thanks for applying’ if that.

  • digiwonk

    This is perhaps not the most professional response I’ve ever left on an article but the truth is this: this article, and this findings it reports, have left me just incredibly sad. Incredibly sad.

    To be forced to choose between a career and a family is not only heartbreaking, but … well … the idea that such a choice is necessary, natural, part of life is ridiculous. An academic career is a long thing, as is parenthood, and each has ebbs and flows.

    I had a child while on the tenure track: despite my very generous Canadian leave, I was a basket case for a good 18 months or so. But I did some great teaching nevertheless, and now my research is really going places and my daughter is five. As it turns out, it is possible to do both: the problems that make it impossible (long hours, funding structures, six years up or out) are structural and cultural and can, and should, in the name of simple humanity, change.

  • butteredtoastcat

    God bless Canada.

    Please don’t follow the US into the abyss.

  • cp3242

    Having worked in admissions for the better part of a decade, I have serious concerns about early action and early decision programs. 

    1) In talking with high school seniors, I’ve come to realize that most of them do not understand these programs. Those who attend private prep schools often have the benefit of former selective admissions counselors turned college counselors. However, most students remain confused. Each school plays the Early Action/Early Decision game differently, so even when I offer free workshops, I can’t education middle income to low-income kids about a common set of standards. 

    2) In addition to not understanding the admission policies, many students misunderstand the financial impact of Early Action or Early Decision. What do terms like “loan free” and “need blind” mean? When I explain to students that meeting “100% of demonstrated need” means that they are still responsible for paying or borrowing whatever the government deems is their EFC, they are often surprised. They thought that applying Early Decision to a “loan free” school was safe… until they realized that as a middle-income kid, they could still be responsible or $20,000/year or more in college costs. I’ve also spoken with students who don’t apply Early Action because they fear financial penalty, even when it’s not binding. I can’t say that I blame them because applying Early Action does give the impression that you’re willing to pay if you’re admitted. 

    3) If you’ve spent much time with seniors, you’ll know that they change their minds almost daily about where they’re going to school. One student who was absolutely CERTAIN of her decision in August when she began the early admissions process was miserable in the spring at the thought of attending the school. Why do we keep pushing the timeline back when the vast majority of students are not ready to make such a heavy decision?