Thank you all of you for all of your replies - they are so interesting and
thoughtful.
I was also really glad to hear form life models - who actually get to
observe far more life classes than most art students or teachers!
My *verdict* is still part of the chapter in progress - but the
intellectual generosity of so many respondents prompts me to make a few
comments at least!
From what I can tell.. ANATOMY classes are taught at the Ruskin School of
Drawing, and they were considering running some cont. ed. courses through
the Slade, and Maybe Edinburgh runs some as well. Mike Esson at
UNSW/college of Fine Arts in Australia also runs anatomy for artists
courses and there's an extra mural medical anatomy course run at Sydney
University as well. the New york Academy of Art teach life sculpture
through making ecorche models - but they don't work with cadavers or do
medical anatomy.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
as for the decline and resurgence....?
From what I can tell - since the 1960's, life drawing has remained a
fairly standard part of instruction in design (including some
architecture) and what in Australia we call the TAFE (a cross between FE &
Polytechnic) art schools, plus 'independent' art schools internationally.
It was seen as a fairly formal means of observational instruction - but
the content of the teaching varied considerably: from Bridgeman to the
Tonks 'ovoid' forms, to Nicolaides type exercises to some quite formal
anatomy based instruction. what type of teaching people received really
depended on WHO they had as an instructor.
The hours of life drawing instruction do seem to have declined recently -
for the ideological reason of 'economic rationalism' - though as one
(interview) respondent pointed out - a room full of easels is a lot
cheaper to maintain than a room full of computers - and life models are so
low paid that tey can't be regarded as expensive.
since the 1960's publicly funded art schools internationally have become
largely incorporated within universities. University based art schools
offer higher level instruction to greater numbers of students - but they
type of instruction has varied. Also University based art schools have
largely replaced 'academies' as the most significant site for the
production of 'professional' artists. From what I can tell - there was a
major cultural shift in the 1960's from the studio emphasis of previous
art schools to the knowledge economy emphasis of contemporary art schools
- but within this general shift in emphasis life classes themselves seem
to have persisted.... though often without any focussed pedagogical
methodology (an exceptions to this would be - the F-studio at the Slade) .
Like in the FE sectors - it seems to have been a bit hit and miss - whether
life drawing was taught in a rigorous manner - or in an experimental manner
- and generally - it has been retained in courses as a 'content free'
observational exercise - without any critical interrogation. Many teachers
are part time/sessional staff - who are brought in to provide instruction -
but who often didn't identify with an institutional culture - or who seem
to separate life room teaching from their own practice. But there are
exceptions and some teachers are thoughtful, provocative and experimental.
Like in the FE and independent sectors - university based art schools have
also been plagued by increasing pressures to cut face to face instruction
and studio classes which are not regarded as cost effective (A Sydney art
faculty recently closed because they were being charged rent per square
metre by the university and were therefore regarded as unprofitable)
My assumption is the awkward silence around the life room has contributed
to the closures because it appears that people don't really have the
critical language with which to defend life drawing as a contemporary
critical or research based practice. This sits oddly with the increasing
emphasis in the UK and Australia on 'drawing' as a form of innovative
research and critical practice, and there is a funny gap between drawing
and 'life drawing'....
At the same time the 'recreational' sectors; evening classes and community
clubs have expanded massively - and well beyond the spheres of aspiring or
actual professional artists - and so life drawing really has flourished as
a broader cultural practice - allowing for increased employment of artists
models and casual instructors.
These are my general impressions - and they are very broad - but I hope
they are of interest. I'm interested in any feedback, criticism or
information that list members might have. - as the more I discover - the
more I realise how little I actually know... it's a familiar story.
If anyone has any more information then please feel free to post - or to
email me off list.
thank you all, once again
Margaret Mayhew
----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
|