EXAMPLES OF THE “EDUCATIONAL TURN” IN CONTEMPORARY ART
1. The School of the Damned – this is a free, student-led “arts and educational platform” which has re-grouped annually since it was formed in 2014. On the School’s website, the say that “we use our collective resources and networks to make the things we want to happen, happen”.
Visit the School of the Damned’s website here:
https://schoolofthedamned.wixsite.com/sotd2019/about
The School’s manifesto is available here:
2. Wolfgang Tillmans – 2017 / Truth Study Center. Installed as part of his Tate Modern exhibition 2017, Tillmans’ Truth Study Center comprised “photographs, articles, objects and drawings that present differing versions of ‘truth’”, displayed across table-tops in the gallery. The interactive installation explored the impact of fake news on our perception of reality, in a uncharacteristically “educational” turn for the German photographer.
More information is available on the Tate website here:
https://www.tate.org.uk/whats-on/tate-modern/exhibition/wolfgang-tillmans-2017/studying-truth
ORIGIN STORIES AND CAUSALITY
ORIGINS
Does the educational turn, in part, originate from technological development?
Does increased availability of all kinds of information via the internet increase the pressure on the “art world” to offer more to it’s audience?
If the artworks or images are widely and freely available to view and use online, then the exhibition must offer something more than the work itself, eg inside information, an experience, a learning opportunity.
Perhaps related to this increased availability of information is an increased “demystification” of art practice and artists, and the artworld itself. So the educational turn could in some way originate in an attempt to connect with the audience on a deeper level, to demonstrate some kind of solidarity or genuine good intention by offering to share what would previously have been thought of as “privileged knowledge”?
I am not sure how to differentiate between origins and causes in this context as both seem to overlap quite a bit. However I will attempt to dig a little deeper into the suggestions below:
Before the development of mechanical reproduction (eg the printing press) and later digital reproduction (delivered via the internet), it was much more difficult to access and share knowledge. Codified knowledge held by institutions like museums and universities would be accessible only to a privelleged few, while tacit knowledge – such as that held by skilled tradespeople – would be kept under wraps as “trade secrets” or similar.
With the increased access to information facilitated by mechanical and then digital reproductive technologies, the general public became able to access the codified knowledge of the institutions and to some extent (via video tutorials and the like) the tacit knowledge of the skilled trades. One consequence of this acceleration of access is that the traditional role and status of the institution has been undermined and people have become equipped to rework or “mod” learning materials, curricula and institutional frameworks for themselves.
In some way I think that the educational turn has developed from a combination of two main factors: technological development, and the institutional response to technological development. I see this as a kind of accelerating cycle that works something like this:
A technology (for example, the internet) takes power from the institution (by making available what was formerly “priellaged” information); the institution responds by offering “more” in some way – more information, more detail, more alternatives. However, any institutional response is inevitably redistributed and thus further undermines the institution. So on one hand the institution is destroying itself through relentlessly democratizing its own knowledge, while on the other hand the general public / technology remains reliant on the institution for the production and publication of that same knowledge.
These are only my initial thoughts on the subject, so I think it would be good to do some further research in this area and revisit these ideas at some point in the future.
EDUCATIONAL AESTHETICS
1. Why is it such a sticking point?
Is aesthetics strongly associated with art, emotion, feeling and creativity – and therefore in some way seen as antithetical to the more logical, scientific and “factual” character of education?
Is aesthetics seen as a superfluous, frivolous or irrelevant aspect of education?
2. Who is un/supportive and why? Are they justified in being suspicious in this way?
Perhaps it is educators themselves who tend to feel that aesthetics is irrelevant to their practice – or perhaps it is something they have not been prompted to consider?
3. What other non-causal critical discussion of the turn can you identify?
Non-causal aspects of the turn could include: histories and interpretations of the turn; speculative futures of the turn; applications of the turn; etc..
