Picking up the pieces from art school.
I believe a school should be a place where knowledge is conveyed from teacher to student, and students grow together by exchanging ideas. Knowledge as in information, skills and guidance in how to practice and learn different subjects and crafts. Once you learn it you then have tools that you can bend to your will in any way you choose. In whatever way or style you express yourself.
That’s what I imagine when I think of school, and it was the experience I had when I studied art overseas several years ago. What I experienced in Stockholm however was an inversion of that. Teachers offered ideas and then the students had to scramble to help each other out with practical knowledge and information. This seemed to be both by design and accident. When knowledge was offered it was rarely on a high enough level to be useful. Sometimes it was even incorrect or hazardous. Like telling students odorless was the key word to know if paint thinner was harmless or not cautioning students who were applying oil paints directly with their bare hands. Sure you can debate exactly how toxic oil paints are, but there are reasons to bring it up. Especially if the studios aren’t even properly ventilated.
I’ll give you an example of a typical course, with a duration of one to two weeks. The teacher informs the students that this and that tool exists. They show some established artists doing impressive work with said tools. There is some kind of lecture or workshop with instructions in how to use these tools, often poorly prepared and on a level below any basic video tutorial you can find for free online. Then the students are supposed to create a work of art to include in their portfolio which will be used to apply to the next school. Every assignment an artistic statement which will decide their fate, before anyone has had a chance to practice anything.
Being an artist who is passionate about painting and craft as a way to express myself, studying here in Sweden was a complete nightmare. Everything was art except for what I did apparently, a mere illustrator, more than once suggesting I need to unlearn my skills in order to be able to do art. I dropped out before the end of the first semester to preserve my health and artistic integrity. And then again for the last time after trying once more at a different school, which in practice was just a disappointing cash grab no matter their intentions. A privilege to be able to do so of course, as art schools are the only way for many to have a chance to focus on art at all. And after you finish art school you become a teacher at an art school to fund your own artistic work. It was always talk about this or that university of art, but after you study there, then what? Where’s the incentive to improve the schools when talented artists will flock to you regardless, not to learn or teach primarily but to just get a chance to do their own thing? This might sound harsh, but the experience I had overall was too often teachers just doing the bare minimum to pass criteria.
What about the art part of it then? I personally found the scope of art as it was presented within the schools to be often quite narrow. When the outspoken goal of a school is to get you accepted into higher level art schools, I guess it all starts to look a little… similar.
In the art history lectures I attended before dropping out the western idea of “progress” was prevalent, and the narrative that we are practicing a supreme form of art evolved from the unscientific, primitive ways of older civilizations, who were just creating delusional depictions of gods and such. Please know my eyes are rolled so far back into my skull it hurts as I write that sentence. I look at the western capitalist, materialist art world and progress is not exactly the word that comes to mind. The way it was framed it seemed like art only really happens in Europe and the US, everywhere else was shockingly brushed aside. Or if a non-western artist was mentioned it was usually withing the context of how they fit into western art history. Few other institutions have made me so sharply aware of my geographical location and it’s implications.
There’s a lot to be said about racism and lack of diversity, and I stand by all who criticize the schools and the art world for it. The schools should embrace such criticism with grace, not hand wringing. How else will they have a chance to improve which they so desperately claim to be doing. I want to improve too, I want to be exposed to ideas that break down the ignorant misconceptions I inevitably grew up with as a white Swedish person. That should be one of the absolute key elements of art schools today! To earnestly challenge and make proper space for varied narratives. It’s high time to rewrite art history to serve us all better.
When I enrolled I hoped to learn new things, like video editing and sculpting, as well as hone my skills in drawing and painting. Several of the other students were interested in painting specifically as well. Some, like me, desired the pursuit of mastery and some just wanted the basics. Students should be able to find that knowledge in art schools who advertise courses in said subjects. Desire should be honored and nurtured, because I will always uphold the idea that art is shaped by desire and the role of an artist is to follow their obsessions. Not to be molded into a shape that will fit into the higher instances of art school and current market demands. Pursuing mastery of craft was apparently out of style still, and any attempt to do so, or even argue based on lived experience that it was possible, was actively discouraged and dismissed. Or sabotaged by bad information. To my disbelief the old lie of “using reference is cheating” is still alive and well, taking on even more sinister forms. I have heard that it originated from the infamous pulp illustrator Frank Frazetta as a way to try to sabotage his competitors. I don’t know if that’s true, but it’s a good story.
I’m not saying all art schools should be like the, so called, academic art schools which I so often got accused of. They already exist and are fantastic if that’s the approach you’re looking for. I’m not, it’s too strict for me. I just want the information offered to be helpful, accurate and on a level that is a little higher than just reading the top of a Wikipedia page.
Of course there are exceptions to all this and so on and so forth. It still needs to be said. My own experience and things I’ve heard over time makes me believe this applies in a general way. Both in entry level and university level art schools. I’m trying to be vague and nonspecific because it’s not about which schools I’m talking about. In the bigger picture it’s about my disappointment with how Sweden keeps it’s art scene inaccessible and mysterious by gate-keeping it through an anti-knowledge and anti-skill approach, where it’s purely the whims of the people on top deciding what is and isn’t good and who gets a chance to be seen. Anyone can be an artist and make art as they please of course, let me just stress that for a moment. This whole essay is wholly focused on the school system and the way they teach, not the nature of art. If you decide to devote years of your life to art school you probably hope to establish yourself as an artist, working in that capacity full time, in which case “succeeding” in some way is required. When the schools doesn’t provide the practical skill sets you need to get ahead, it becomes a matter of who has the most resources to find the information and training they require privately. So it might seem like a wonderfully fair and democratic idea to have schools focus on only letting their students do whatever they want (or in reality whatever the teachers subjectively approve of) because art can be anything. Indeed it can! But no matter how you express yourself, in order to really get ahead you need a chance to hone whatever it is you do and the tools you use. So if the schools truly want to give anyone a fair chance to succeed they must learn to teach again, and reclaim dignity and pride in the various crafts they offer as part of their programs.
I’m done with these institutions and couldn’t care less about what the highest instance of Swedish art authority thinks of me should they happen to stumble upon my work. But I will never forgive the schools their dishonesty, wasting mine and others time and money by not being up front with what they actually provide. If you’re reading this and feel discouraged about finding a school in Sweden which will teach you visual art crafts, your best bet is probably to study video games or animation, in all seriousness. Or apply to one of the academic art schools if you can afford it. Whichever craft it is you love, find a commercial variant of it and study there to actually learn it. Sadly.
My time as a student taught me a lot certainly, but not in the way I had imagined. I learned important lessons about what art is to me, by being exposed to all kinds of ways it isn’t. About which spaces I do not want to be in. And which institutions to avoid. After my brush with art school here in the capital of Sweden I wholeheartedly embrace the role of, so called, outsider artist. Sounds cool too, as a bonus.
The image attached to this post was not done in school.
