Tyler is trashing the New York School of the Visual Art's new art criticism MFA program. Fair enough. I'm by no means opposed to the notion of graduate education, but browsing through the course catalogue, it sounds a little loosey-goosey to me—nothing you couldn't come by in undergrad or with some focus in other graduate departments. (Or, to borrow from what the man said, with a library card and $20 in MoMA tickets.)
But I have to wonder about the merits of SVA given the fact that the school runs an art therapy master's program. At the very least I would seek assurances that there is not so much as overlap of the premises between the two programs before I asked for a pamphlet. Art therapy is a profession in which questionably licensed individuals seek to cure people of various afflictions by orchestrating tonic-seekers' emotions in the presence of art. Worse still—for various reasons I have had some contact with literature related to complementary and alternative medicines—art therapy primarily targets people suffering from addiction and cancer. Which are—incidentally!—very persistent, very cure-resistant afflictions.
The National Institutes of Health National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine* at least does the courtesy of distinguishing veritable (measurable) and putative (wholly imaginary) types of CAM. And I would believe that even the really egregious stuff could potentially induce beneficial psychosomatic effects. As with hypnosis or prayer, I personally don't see that fooling yourself with energy-field rituals and abstract landscape paintings is worth the trade-off in the alleviation of stress, blood pressure, high cholesterol, etc.
But cancer and addiction are a different league entirely—people recover by the aid of doctors and prescriptions, and these diseases are prevented by conscientious politics and early detection. What a cruel trick to use art to inspire false hope. Again, everyone has to find his way to sleep at night—but the academy shouldn't be selling snake oil.
* Your tax dollars at work. At one point the acronym for the agency was OCCAM, leading me to believe it was an elaborate joke.
Posted by Kriston at March 18, 2005 8:08 AMBut cancer and addiction are a different league entirely—people recover by the aid of doctors and prescriptions, and these diseases are prevented by conscientious politics and early detection.
I've read this several times now and I'm afraid I still don't understand what role conscientious politics plays in preventing cancer or addiction. If I write earnest letters to my Congressman and the local newspaper supporting PAYGO, is that as good as a colonoscopy? Is my failure to face up to alleged problems of long-term financing of entitlements responsible for why I'm always hungover?
I can understand how one could say "yes" to the first question, but I think a love of cheap rum plays a greater role in the second.
Posted by: Miguel Sánchez at March 18, 2005 1:00 PMI was thinking about health care—access to reliable sources of health care being highly correlated with the detection of cancer at earlier stages. I wasn't really trying to make it a real right/left issue, but I'm sorry to say that your failure to face up to alleged problems of long-term financing of entitlements is, in fact, why you're hungover.
Posted by: Kriston at March 18, 2005 1:13 PMYeah, but sorry for skipping between macro and micro like that on yeah.
I'm hoping Tom will show up and make the counterintuitive, hard cognitive case for mumbo jumbo.
Posted by: Kriston at March 18, 2005 1:16 PMI'm sorry to say that your failure to face up to alleged problems of long-term financing of entitlements is, in fact, why you're hungover.
I can't help myself. I tried a lockbox, but I just ended breaking it open.
I understand now, though I think level of education, wealth, and employment status might better correlate to health care access than any sort of politics, conscientious or otherwise.
Posted by: Miguel Sánchez at March 18, 2005 1:22 PMKriston,
It is a bit of a mischaracterization to suggest that art therapy is meant to treat (cure, heal, etc.) cancer or addiction.
It is a mental health intervention that attempts to help people cope better. I really don’t know how effective art therapy is at meeting this goal, but to criticize the practice because it does not cure cancer seems off.
FYI – from the American Art Therapy Association
“Art therapy is based on the belief that the creative process involved in the making of art is healing and life-enhancing. Through creating art and talking about art and the process of art making with an art therapist, one can increase awareness of self, cope with symptoms, stress, and traumatic experiences, enhance cognitive abilities, and enjoy the life-affirming pleasures of artistic creativity.” (http://www.arttherapy.org/aboutarttherapy/about.htm)
John
You present a highly skewed view of art therapy. One art therapist I know, who works in a public school setting, primarily works with autistic and developmentally delayed kids who don't function well in a mainstream class setting. Her work enables kids who don't communicate verbally well (or at all in some cases) to have another outlet to express themselves constructively.
I know NO art therapists who would claim to be treating an illness like cancer although they might well help someone cope with the emotional aspects of a serious illness. Not at all the same thing.
Posted by: Leslie at March 18, 2005 9:20 PMWow, Kriston, all this time I thought art therapy was something to help artists break our addiction to making art, so we could lead normal mainstream lives. Who knew? :)
Posted by: David at March 19, 2005 2:36 AMIn 1859 Florence Nightingale spoke of the effects of beautiful objects as an actual
means of recovery for patients. Its easy to be dismissive of the healing benefits of art unless you have experienced it first hand as we do on a daily basis at NIH.
Didn't Polluck's drip paintings have something to do with therapy during one of the few dry spells in his life?
Posted by: matty at March 21, 2005 1:57 PMGiven that you have to be nuts to think you can survive by doing art, I am not sure the distinction between the art criticism and the art therapy program is all that great.
Both of them are about finding ways of making artists "sane", which is a code word for taking a nice job gutting fish so as to be a productive member of society.
Since I cut my thumbs off I am safe. In fact, I now have a job as an art therapist.
Posted by: David Tiley at March 25, 2005 8:32 AMMatty: Pollock did Jungian-ifluenced images after the drip paintings while he was undergoing therapy; I have no idea whether he was dry or not.
I briefly considered this MFA program in the course of contemplating a PhD in art history. Then a trusted advisor pointed out to me who is running it. No thank you. I'd rather blog.
Posted by: Franklin at March 25, 2005 12:57 PMYour Blog is so sweet! Your posts give me ideas and I start really thinking. Thank you!
Posted by: Dwight Spear at March 27, 2011 8:49 AMThis is such a cool contest that you are providing and you give it away for free. I enjoy seeing website that understand the value of providing a prime resource for free. I truly loved reading your post. Thanks!
Posted by: golf swing training aids at March 27, 2011 8:24 PMI am very enjoyed for this blog. Its an informative topic. It help me very much to solve some problems. Its opportunity are so fantastic and working style so speedy. I think it may be help all of you. Thanks.
Posted by: Brinda Hinkson at April 24, 2011 4:06 AMI love reading your post! Great information and it is also very well written. I will bookmark and comeback soon.
Posted by: Frederick Prestridge at June 30, 2011 11:04 AM