Last year, a professor led a discussion in one of my advanced studio classes about student "placement" rates. Most colleges try to collect data about post-graduation placement and alumni involvement with their degrees. In the visual arts program, it is a bit difficult to determine an actual "placement," since degrees don't lead to traditional jobs. Yet there is an even more disturbing track record for visual arts graduates than most other degrees. It turns out that after 5-10 years, only 5% of BFA graduates are still doing art. Not just that 95% of students aren't doing art on a regular basis, but aren't even making art at all. Only 5% are still making any amount of art.
Females have a lower percent of continuing in the arts than males. This difference between whether a man or a woman goes on to do something with their degree in the arts is staggering. The high concentration of women in my art classes also shows a horrible trend in these numbers; there are on average 7 out of 10 students are females in my classes. With the large proportions of women in my classes and the dramatically small amount of women involved professionally in the arts, most of my classmates don't have a good probability of continuing to do art later in life.
So this week, during midsemester group reviews, another professor brought these statistics up. He also pointed out that 50% of people who graduate with their MFAs (literally an average of $50,000 for their graduate level education) don't continue on to do more art. With that in mind, he continued with the group critique. This left me, all week long, thinking about the relevancy of my classmates' opinions and comments.
5% is a very small number, especially when dealing with an already small population (my classes are usually no larger than 15 students). I've already thought about the personal consequences of these numbers. As a male art student, I have a much higher probability of continuing with professional art. But probabilities mean nothing on a personal level. As a person, I am 27 years old, doing art more vigoriously than I ever have in the past. Most students, by my age, have either decided to continue on with art or to move on to some other career choice.
I tried not to let this affect my attitude. I wanted to get the most out of the comments in my group critiques as well as the group projects we have to work on in my sculpture class. But the impact of these thoughts has left me skeptical about the environment I'm in.
Yet, this train of thought led me to understand better the philosophy behind very competitive/limited art school admissions. Some of the better schools have very competitive admissions, only admitting 6 students a year to their programs. I think this is a weeding process, trying to restrict entrance to only those who are dedicated enough to make something out of their education. I'm not saying that this philosophy is effective in its aims, but the idea is still (possibly) there.
As this idea was mulling around my head, I thought that maybe I should be more selective about which schools I should enter. Instead of agreeing to go to a second choice school, I could take a residency for a year and spend my time with professionals who are committed to their art and serious about the art community. So we started looking into art residencies.
Most of them are fairly isolated geographically (we could do an art residency in Yosemite National Park!) and vary widely in every possible aspect of the residency: housing, time spent, cost, etc. We might end up doing a residency for a while next year if I don't get into the schools I'm aiming for.
This week we also spent some time looking at digital cameras. Having to document my artwork has been a tricky business for many years. Sadly, the art world is still interested principally in slides and refutes those of us who want to document our work digitally. Yet, the more contemporary art circles (land art, video art, performance and installations) are starting to prefer more dynamic methods of documentation like video. Since slides are still an integral part of showing my work, we've started considering other alternatives that might make sense. Digital cameras are still very expensive and we'd need to get a fancy one (a non-point-and-click camera) in order to get the best color and focus (for conversion to good old fashioned 35-mm slides). For the time being, I'm borrowing a friend's digital camcorder (thanks a million Dave!) and that should suffice our needs for video (digital is easier to edit and higher quality than our Hi-8 camcorder). But even though we've really appreciated Aunt Sharla lending us her digital camera for all this time, we know that someday we need to give it back to her (so she has to learn to use it! :) ). Ah, if only they didn't cost $500.
Rebecca had her first mutual activity this week. She mostly just had a presidency meeting and was introduced to the girls. The previous presidency was still in charge of this activity but the new presidency got to know the girls a bit and are anxious to do some fun activities soon.
We've both got midterms this week and will be very busy. Our annual trip to Oregon is coming up and I've been thinking a great deal about that. It's been five years since my close friend McKell died on the coast and the impact that's he had on my life is immeasurable. I always look forward to this "pilgrimage" with deep humility.
We hope you all have a great week, lots of love,
Wayne and Rebecca
- ‹ previous
- 52 of 798
- next ›