Enseñanza de vanguardia y tradición clásica

Abstract

We have reached the end of a century which has been marked by crisis in and the questioning of systems of art teaching. Academicism (the style or kind of teaching at historical academies) has been rejected by modernity for its imposition of a practice which was solely of the retina, acritical and ritualised. The model known today as the “Bauhaus model”, based on the triad “creativity-medium-invention”, is most representative of modern new pedagogy and is still for many the only valid archetype for providing opposition to the academic model. But with the crisis of modernity, the Bauhaus paradigm is currently also in decline. The truth is that the schools that founded the new pedagogy have had time to grow old and to really found a tradition. The crisis of modernity is a crisis that still needs to be greatly reflected on. Utopia has not been realised and the programme proposed by modernity has been diluted into an à la page experimentalism, synchronised with the most artistic currents that are often hidden beneath the term “artistic research”. In the seventies and eighties the new modern pedagogy became a de-specialisation of artistic education, hiding under the generic term “research”. This term covered a wide and diffuse range of artistic practices. In general it corresponds to the degree of specificity the aspiring artist wishes to assume. “My research” thus becomes the value giving formulation of “my work” (Moulin, 1992). By incorporating the concepts of “research” and “inter-disciplinariety” together with the attitude of carrying out different artistic practices without any particular content being specified, we find ourselves today quite within the dominion of “general art” as opposed to the particular dominions of painting, sculpture, architecture, and so on (Th. de Duve, 1992).