Art?

[Expired Manwich of Doom]

So, being the only Visual Arts HL student in my year (among the history of my school having only had three), I've also noticed, based on your signatures, that many of you don't take an arts subject. Not that I look at this in disdain, given certain university/career choices. But I've been wondering, what are your views about the importance of art, especially its context of being optional in the Hexagon, should it be taken more seriously, etc.

On a personal note, I always found it annoying when people asked me about my hobbies, and when I replied I illustrated, they would usually think I was the kid who just doodled or was the fangirl type person -- until they saw what I meant by illustration; they didn't take art seriously

[dessskris]

I like arts, I like graphic designing although I can't say I'm a pro! I love it though. but I'm not good at painting, or drawing by hand. I'm also not very creative... so I thought I would fail Visual Arts if I take it anyway lol.

I actually wish I could take Arts, but at that time (when I chose my subjects) I wanted to study Chemical Engineering (I've changed my mind recently ) so I chose to take two sciences, hence I didn't take Arts.

I don't look down on artists though. they're really awesome. I appreciate any kind of art work, and I think arts also need some kind of talent, skills and artists need to study arts too. it's nothing to be frowned upon. instead I look up to them.

however I think it's sad that Arts is only offered in group 6 and group 6 includes all the other subjects. so many people who want to take another science, another humanities or another language would be unable to take arts.

I kinda think it would be cool if CAS emphasises more on the arts and sports, maybe make some artistic or sporty projects compulsory so that students who don't take arts & sports can still be artistic, and healthy, in a way.

[TurtleR]

Well you have to keep in mind that, for example at my school arts is only offered if you choose to give up chemistry.

Not to mention that, in terms of IB, what do you think would result in a higher mark? I would have loved to have taken Art, but because its only offered as HL at our school, I don't think I could handle it. Also, honestly speaking, I can do MUCH better at chemistry than art.

Does art need to be taken more seriously? I don't think so, because I havent met many people who actually look down upon art. They may look down upon certain mediums and methods, but not art as a whole. I think that students simply need to be informed of the alternative paths they can take. For example, when my french teacher told our class (not sure if you were there) about how you can take art, and simply take chemistry during summer school, I wish I had thought of that earlier, since Chem HL is a bit too much for me...it's just that, at our school, theres a mentality of "Art or Chem. Choose" so naturally, Art takes a backseat because Chem is preferred by Universities depending where you want to go.

Also, on your personal note, when you mention art as a "hobby" instead of mentioning its a subject you're going to be taking for three semesters, people are just going to assume it's doodles. I guess it's also because you don't see many artists on a day to day basis.

[Expired Manwich of Doom]

Well you have to keep in mind that, for example at my school arts is only offered if you choose to give up chemistry.

Haha you speak as if we go to different schools

The big (as in MAMMOTHGINORMOUSENORMOUSPRODIGIOUS) misconception about IB (visual) arts, is that you're not evaluated based on skill. The three candidates in the past who took art simply took it because they didn't want to experience the nightmares of Chemistry HL; they had no previous artistic experience. I believe they were predicted around 6. The examination is more like maths; you're evaluated more based on your rationale and background research. Heck, a good deal of some of their works were no more than photography or abstract pieces; one does not need to be a 'precision painter' to do well at art.

That's also part of the reason why I chose VA HL over Chem HL, even though I intend on going into both exercise science and art; it is a definite for 7 me, and I've just completed grade 12 chemistry over summer school (albeit poorly )

But the fact that the person automatically assumes that they are pieces as simple as 'doodles' implies that they may have similar thoughts about art, does it not? As well, the arts department of most of the schools I've known, are usually the last to get the funding from the school, and are thus the most broke, despite the fact that they usually require similar amounts, if not more, than the other departments. That also seems to be reflected in society; funding is usually cut from humanities before other sectors (although sometimes I can't argue against that ).

[TurtleR]

Haha yeah a certain someone told me you got mad at him using your name, I thought you might want to be anonymous or something.

Yes but with a subject such as art, personally speaking I don't think I could handle VA HL because of the fact that art is something I like to do in moderation, not with 3 semesters back to back. If you don't want to do it, chances are you wont do well at it.

And although skill isnt needed, it sure does make your work more worthwhile if you feel as if you put a lot of skill into it.

And not necessarily. It's like saying "My hobby is jogging" then you're not going to assume the person is a marathon runner, right? The first thing people think would likely be a jogger than runs around the neighbourhood park. Same with art. If you express it as simply a "hobby" as opposed to something you're serious about, people will assume they're just doodles. It doesn't have anything to do with looking down at art in general. And true, arts departments in school and humanities usually receive the least amount of funding, but I think this is due to the fact that some things are just regarded as essential, such as money going towards research for a cause. Also, as you said, there aren't that many students left in art. Many take it still, yes, but if the amount of students taking art is significantly less than the amount of students taking chemistry, then chances are, chemistry is going to get more funding...

[CkyBlue]

Hey is that certain someone me? I don't remember that he got mad at me for using his name... I didn't go for the last name, and the first name doesn't really tell you anything... But my real name was one IBS for quite a while.

Perhaps, it's the way you word it. Our classmate has a good point saying how people may assume the wrong things about you. So mabbe when you're asked again, you can say something like, "I like to draw; I'm an artist." The artist part will really make them understand a lot more. Plus, given your social environment, art is pretty neglected in our school anyway, although we do respect what you make xp

Well art is a form of expression, and it can tell us things that sometimes words can't. It paints a picture, tells us a story, is a symbol of something even bigger, etc. You get what I mean loll

In regards to it being only an option in the hexagon, the arts aren't really a necessary, essential, hardcore course, like math or language A1. I do believe it is right that it is only an option, because a good handful of people are more geared towards the sciences, the traditional, down to earth subjects, while art is something completely different, as it demands creativity and openness.

But I do think art should be taken a bit more seriously. Mabbe it's the lack of general understanding. I mean, art is one of the most beautiful things in existence, don't you agree?

[Expired Manwich of Doom]

Haha, I only intended for my personal note to be an example about how I felt art is usually taken lightly

I think that's going to lead into another discussion about assumptions....

But it seems that, as the sciences are developping rapidly now, and very publicly, the (visual) art movement seems somewhat left behind, or at least not being covered as explicitly. Most of the 'big' jobs are science/math based; should art have a similar role or importance in society?

[CkyBlue]

I agree with you in the idea that art is being left behind.

Remember the good old, OLD days, where there were people that were true geniuses, Davinci, Michaealangelo, etc. In those times science and technology weren't biggies that dominated society. It was more arts and literature based. Simply, the focus was more on art and less on other subjects. Art, back then was actually part of an essential education I'm guessing. But now, as you have said, science and recent developments have caught up, and jumped leagues ahead of art even, and that is why I'm guessing about the lack of conceptions of current everyday people regarding art.

Science and technology are integrated into our society because it is integral in making our lives better. That is the incentive to study it. Art, on the other hand, lacks this type of use. It does not have the same importance, but should it? Maybe so! Art is a beautiful thing, and it is really a mark of a higher ended educated person to study it, master it and appreciate it. Heck with all the modern techno-crud we are getting use to, it is a good lesson to reflect and appreciate the fine things in retrospect.

[The Filipino Limner]

Visual Arts! Whoa!

Just these past few months, when I was given the opportunity to choose my courses, I really choose visual arts, and I thought lots of people wouldn't choose it as well, since we're an all-boys school, and given our background, we're supposed to be learning how to do business. (Cause we're in the Philippines, and that's what we're "expected" to do!)

But then I found out that nearly 1/3 of our batch actually took visual arts, and while I'm dying taking Chemistry, they're just chilling during visual arts class!

Looking at it at a deeper perspective, art is a way for you to express yourself, and a creative way at that, which no other language can surpass. Art transcends languages, and if you chose to take art, then, that's very good. Since if you really wanted it, then it means you'll commit to it, which is what's needed for IB.

They always say that following your heart is most important, and for once in your IB journey, you'll need to do that, and I'm glad you were able to, since studying a subject in IB will not be a simple commitment; rather, it is an unbreakable vow you have to take with you for the next two years of your life.

[Arrowhead]

I guess this is something that varies from school to school. At my old school there were a number of people who took VA HL/SL and they took it alongside some hardcore science and Maths classes. But in my opinion, the Art classes go beyond just VA. Although its not included in my signature I did a certificate course in Theatre SL and got a 7 in it. I just didn't include it in any of my applications to the UK because I was applying for Law and mostly all the good Unis' Law departments discount Theatre altogether as a subject.

I think one of the reasons that the Group 6 in optional is because Art is something that is born out of interest on the student's part. Forcing a student to take one Science, Maths, English, and one Social Science is kind of a like a prerequisite to a well-rounded education. IB makes Art optional because (and this is me assuming) all students take one or more types of Art classes throughout their schooling at some point. Those students who develop a flair and interest in it (in whatever form) pursue it in the IB, those who don't, are given freedom to pursue subjects that are more in line with their own interests.

I think the fact that the Group 6 exists, shows that IB cares for Art. But it being optional is less to do with being disrespectful to Art and more for being useful to the students in question. There are only so many hours in a day, with 6 IB classes (traditionally) and ToK over that (usually as a 7th class) its very difficult for students to manage their time. Couple this with the fact that for a degree in Medicine, more than one science is mandatory, or even Engineering, or for Law, two social sciences (one being History) is considered useful (but not mandatory). Furthermore, if a student is terrible at Maths, they can practice the techniques, they can do sums, they can memorise formulae and strategies and still emerge with a 6. If someone struggles with History, reading and reading and memorising and making charts and what-not makes a high grade achievable. But if someone is just not into Theatre by their very nature, or produces wooden performances onstage, or is uncomfortable with public speaking, Theatre would be more than a challenge, it would be a nightmare. Like if I was in a school that only offered VA and Group 6 was mandatory, I would just not do the IB, because I hate painting and drawing and all that jazz. More power to the people who love and enjoy it, but its just not for me and never will be.

Its also not easy to maintain all the Arts subjects in the IB because they are substantially more resource-consuming than a science classroom. I mean for Chemistry, you need a lab, some chemicals, a teacher, and a textbook. For History, you need a teacher, a textbook, and the internet (for the IA). For Theatre, you need an auditorium, you need a reasonably adequate budget for performances and shows, you need to bring in speakers and guest lecturers on different theatrical forms (because expecting one teacher to be brilliant at it all is unfair). At my IB school's sister school in Switzerland called Le Rosé, the Theatre teacher had one guest lecturer flown in every month to teach a different form of theatre and theatricality. Our school couldn't afford that so we used to shuttle in buses and go there. You need a lot more exposure for such classes, we would raise funds in the school to afford excursions to Geneva and London to watch shows for research and stuff. Arts classes are expensive. Not all schools can afford them, and if you can't give the best resources, for such classes, the students' grades will suffer and they will not get decent IB scores. In future, lesser students will be interested and the departments need for funds will dwindle, making it a downward spiral.

I don't think IB neglects the Arts, its just unreasonable on multiple fronts to expect schools and students to afford and excel in them universally.

Edited August 24, 2011 by Arrowhead

[khalid]

I've always been terrible in Art, But I dont think art is useless. Take for instance, Leonardo Da Vinci become famous and rich because of art. So it plays a big role in society