"The
point of creative studies, says Roger L. Firestien, a Buffalo State
professor and author of several books on creativity, is to learn
techniques “to make creativity happen instead of waiting for it to
bubble up. A muse doesn’t have to hit you.”
The idea of creative studies is really interesting to me and kind of exciting. The idea that we should re-think how much value creative thought has in society is really great and I think could have big implications for the way we think about art education in this country. HOWEVER, what is kind of disturbing to me about this description of creative studies is its primary focus on the market value of creativity. This is a really different conversation than thinking of creativity and arts education as integral to a democratic society, which is the conversation that we generally gravitate towards in this department. After reading this, I also feel kind of confused about whether creativity studies is meant to push up against the standardized test movement of measurement, which this article implies, or does it in a sense also try to standardize a thought process? I'm not sure, but I'm curious about what other people think about it and what that ven diagram might look like.
I too become concerned with the over emphasis on the market value of education. Often arts education is treated as a means to an end rather than an end in itself (i.e. drawing can help with biology, music can help with math, etc.). Sometimes I become nostalgic for earlier form of education, when all subjects were seen as important for a well-rounded, educated individual.
ReplyDelete