Of course, there are exceptions everywhere and always, and I finished school almost fifteen years ago. But the fact that artistic education has remained on the margins of general education programs for more than three decades of independence is also testified by researchers in this field.
Read more Germany-led «frugal» EU member states call to cut proposed budget expenditures
In a scientific article published this year by Natalija Mažeikienė, Lina Kaminskienė, Leta Dromantienė, and Ilona Tandzegolskienė-Bielaglovė, it is stated that despite the social and emotional benefits provided for student development, artistic education plays second fiddle in the national education program. In an overloaded, exam-oriented education system, there is hardly any time to foster creativity, and the arts subjects themselves become relevant only to those who intend to choose these fields of study.
The undervaluation of the arts in the formal education system leads to several problems that do not disappear once the school doors are closed.
First, it creates the image that art is essentially unimportant, useless, and only concerns the artists themselves. Both sides suffer from this. By not providing tools in time to understand the language of different art fields, we lose not only potential talents but also viewers, listeners, and exhibition visitors. Having never seen contemporary art and never discussed it, it is less likely that in ten years you will stop by an exhibition on your way home from work. You will probably think it is not for you – that’s Andrius from the parallel class, he had enhanced art classes.
By narrowing cultural participation (i.e., not creating conditions for those whose families or social environment do not lead them to culture to participate), culture itself begins to associate for part of society not with the history of ideas, a way to understand and critically reflect on the world around us, or the possibility of aesthetic and emotional impact, but with something separated from “serious matters.”
In such a society, culture constantly has to prove its usefulness or even its right to exist. The intolerance caused by this gap can manifest not only in talk about freeloading artists, complaints about culturally incomprehensible forms in terms of content and form, or sculptures being set on fire. A society that finds culture essentially alien has less and less will to defend it when a threat arises.
A society that finds culture essentially alien has less and less will to defend it when a threat arises.
Second, the current system also entrenches an internal hierarchy of cultural fields. At its absolute top is literature, institutionalized as a necessary part of general education – after all, you cannot finish school without being familiar with Sruoga, Dante, or Žemaitė. Literature is presented in the program as a distinct system that is learned to be analyzed and interpreted.
In a weaker but still somewhat privileged position are fine arts and architecture, presented in the history program in outline. Although it also mentions individual creators from other fields, visual arts up to the 20th century are presented relatively more consistently, although in this narrative they appear more as illustrations of history rather than fields with their own artistic development and language. But everyone knows that you might have to distinguish a Doric column from a Corinthian one in the matriculation exam. And that makes you step up.
All other cultural fields that do not significantly enter the “serious” subject programs often remain a few historical counterpoints, self-expression clubs, or fillers of free time. I remember how during an ethics lesson the teacher turned on the movie “The Princess Diaries.” After the noisy viewing, we discussed nothing, although from today’s perspective, a good discussion question would be: how much does the education system determine that we consider literature high art, and cinema a consumable entertainment suitable only for relaxation?..
Of course, one could argue that Lithuania has many fantastic educational projects, many of which become accessible through the Culture Pass program. This year, the amount allocated per student for cultural education per year reaches up to 14 euros.
In the current state of the education system, diagnosing new illnesses seems almost indecent. But maybe now is the time for a fundamental reboot…
However, in a program with more than 5800 (!) proposals, already hopelessly overloaded teachers have to engage in separate investigative work, trying to select the most suitable activities. Thus, we face a third problem – instead of systematic cultural literacy education, we have an overly abundant pot of projects of very different cultural value. The quality of such episodic experiences becomes not the system’s but the teachers’ responsibility. As Kristina Steiblytė wrote two years ago, using the Culture Pass “there is a chance to learn to travel the worst cultural routes, never experiencing what really high-quality art is, how it looks and works.”
In the current state of the education system, diagnosing new illnesses seems almost indecent. But maybe now is the time for a fundamental reboot, involving problems that have long been neglected on the margins?
I want to see the day when a music lesson becomes a serious subject. And I am not talking about an inflated program or overly strict discipline based on exam fear. Unlocking the cultural field means unlocking a new world. It is a great asset that, if needed, we can measure by critical thinking, emotional well-being, and even economic indicators. But to achieve this, proper attention is necessary. Artistic education should “count” not only when you are lucky enough to get a talented teacher who is always going the “extra mile.” First and foremost, it should be so in the eyes of the system itself.
Read more Seeing what was written under the photo of the deceased boy – Fausta Marija was horrified
