Over the last week, I’ve been mulling over in my mind what Dewey has labeled “the rise of the compartmental conception of fine art,” a scenario in which the fine arts have been set apart from 'normal experience' and one which inevitably leads to the formation of the public's concept that art resides in a higher plane than the rest of human experience (6). As an emerging art museum educator, I find myself constantly attempting to figure out how to break down this perceived barrier of entry. It is a perceived barrier rather than a real threat for many reasons but primarily because art--like everything else in this world--is the compilation of experiences across a specific point in time and nothing more. I won't deny the fact that these are refined experiences of thought and behavior; however, that doesn't change the fact that art is still formed from the same material as other entities within the world. Why, then, is there such a problem relating with the arts? Why are we so afraid/resistant to connect?
As I have been studying and rearticulating Dewey's theories on experience, I have in turn been looking for ways in which these concepts find form in the real world of art museums. As an intern at the Denver Art Museum, I have spent a couple of afternoons facilitating gallery activities within the temporary exhibition The Psychedelic Experience. As part of the interpretive plan for the show, an area called Side Trip has been dedicated to creating an immersive environment in which individuals can participate in a variety of activities that serve to connect their lives (and the experiences across their lifetime) with the exhibition content. Not only is every area conducive to the visitor's complete immersion within the culture of the late 60s, but it allows visitors to contribute to the museum's perspective of what was significant about this period of US history. This proves to be a good example of the application of Dewey's most complicated ideas.
A few key aspects of the exhibit component really serve to model some of the issues that Dewey has been talking about as of late. First of all, Dewey has expressed this idea that experience is a result of the coming together of both learner and environment, but that it only fully achieves its potential when the learner contributes to this process of learning. At the DAM, this is precisely what is happening. Visitors come to the museum with their own stories, they become immersed in a completely different environment than they are accustomed to, they in some way become motivated to action, and then they contribute. Walking around the gallery, you witness individuals leaving messages on fake telephones describing their experiences throughout the late 60s: what gave them passion, what caused them heartache, what brought them to the breaking point, what lead them to experimentation, what provoked them to fight for social change, etc.; and you see them writing down some of their "Firsts" on a series of Rolodexes. I can't help but think that what makes this exhibit wildly successful is the fact that true learning is occurring through true experiences being had (more on that in the next post). There is something magical/transformative about the power to add meaning to an experience that wouldn't be complete without it. Dewey has something here...The need to contribute on some level has proved itself to be successful in cultivating within learners a sense of purpose that ultimately leads to the opening of new doors. The DAM proves it.
Amid all the failures, here we have a story about how art museums can break down these pesky perceived barriers of entry: they leave room for the contribution of the learner. There are many reasons why I think this is the case. Clearly, embedding within the visitors a sense of ownership of experience is only one of them. I'm only left to ponder: why are these types of experiences offered by museums so few and far between? Are we the ones sustaining these perceived barriers? If so, what for? For our pride? For some curator's pride in his content expertise? Seems like we need to grow up a bit and push for change like the hippies of the 60s.
Check out what Nina Simon had to say about the DAM's Side Trip experience:
http://museumtwo.blogspot.com/2009/03/take-side-trip-to-denver-art-museum.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You'll be happy to know that my mother told me about this exhibit, and how important it was for her to see it. In fact, I believe she said, 'you have to see this to understand my generation.' She was very impressed with what she experienced and the interactions that she and her other visiting companions had.
ReplyDeleteI think you are getting at something here with the barriers. The biggest one that sticks out to me is that the visitors are actually able to contribute (a big theme that you've hit upon), but also that part of them is included in that exhibit for others to see later. So they have in a sense, created an aesthetic component to what is presented.