search  current discussion  categories  philosophy 

every child an artist, true or false

updated fri 28 feb 97


Timothy & Lauren Loftus on sun 16 feb 97


I do agree that differences are important. With out them we would all be
really bored. Never did I suggest we should deny the difference between true
talent and the opposite. I'm not encouraging mediocrity, I'm encouraging
exploration of creativity.

I believe all children should be thoroughly exposed to art. How long has it
been since you were in grade school? I'm sure you know there is an art
shortage in today's schools. I graduated from high school in 1991, I had
never seen a potters wheel, never learned the way to stretch a canvas, had
no idea what analytical perspective involved! I didn't get enough art. I was
required to take physical education classes, even though I really, really,
really didn't have any talent in that area, and, surprise!-- I'm not an
Olympic athlete! But there were no real art classes, and I'm an artist. (I
really am, I'm not just saying that...or am I? If you see my works and
disagree, does that mean I'm no longer an artist?)

you said:
>But I see serious social costs in denying real differences.
>If talent goes uncultivated, it will wither.

My whole point was that there are a lot of social problems right now in the
world and steps toward a remedy would be to educate children as to the value
of art. They go out and do it naturally, look at the writing on the walls
(grafitti). Art has more than one purpose, and glorifying someone's talent
is only one of them.

I said in my first post on the subject:
>It does take practice, but any talent can be developed into something that
will >give, if not the next Wonder of the World, at least deep personal
satisfaction >to the individual.

so, Jeff, where do we disagree?
Also, I am really enjoying this discussion!

Lauren Loftus
Monroe, Louisiana