The Luxury of Art School

[TheStranger]

I feel that art school is ultimately a luxury.  Schools are overpriced compared to inflation.  Graduates fight over the same few jobs and opportunities which don't pay great or have good, if any, job security.  Debt-to-income ratio can become a huge problem that limits their opportunities in life. Those who want to start up a retirement account as soon as possible are not in a position to do so.  Those who want to consider saving up a down payment to eventually buy a home may never see the opportunity arise.  Those who get married or are considering having kids can't simply put them into debt or not work to go to school which may not even pay off.

 

I've been following this forum for about 5 years and while I started off wanting to apply, I have actually never applied to an MFA program as I began to realize certain things.

 

Your thoughts?

[kafralal]

It is both a luxury of time and money.  Even more so if there is no funding and if your time would be better (for any number of reasons) spent elsewhere. Depending on your long term desires, you have to decide whether it is a good use of your time and money.
I don't think this is a discussion particular to art and an MFA; what you have described is common to most dedicated learning situations.
I am an older student who home schooled—rather unschooled—four children and so I am a big proponent of both life (autodidactic)-learning  and life-long learning, but university has provided me (and my children) access to an environment of accelerated learning and intensity that I have recently enjoyed making use of. It has also given me access to ideas and people that I have been hard pressed to find elsewhere.
I dropped out of university when I was in my twenties because I wasn't capable of taking advantage of that particular situation at that particular time, neither emotionally, intellectually,  economically, nor in terms of family. School can be an incubator of ideas if used well. How long each person will benefit from it is an individual choice. Some never get that benefit for all kinds of reasons. Some would like it and should have the opportunity but don't, while others find that kind of intense environment elsewhere—school is not the only incubator of ideas / way to get an education or opportunity to challenge default thinking. I think the key is being able to find the intensity of learning that you're looking for wherever you can find it.
By all accounts education (including art education) is considered a luxury in every country that does't provide free access to higher education for everyone. Collectively, we don't really think it is worth the money necessary to make opportunities available at an institutional level to challenge the assumptions (both good and bad) that we absorb as we grow up.
It is difficult to change that kind of embedded devaluation. The thinking is something like "it wasn't there for us, so you'll have to earn it, or not, like we did, or didn't". There is no collective sense of the huge benefits to society that thoughtful, self-reflexive people provide, both socially and economically—not (just) in terms of production and earning power, as we usually like to frame it—but because more thoughtful, self-reflexive people make life better for everyone. Art education (in school or otherwise) is just one of the ways that we can challenge ourselves to be more thoughtful and self-reflexive.
That you are still checking in with this forum, TheStranger, seems to indicate that you might not (yet) have found the  situation that will help you do all in life and art you aspire to, and that in some ways you would still like to do an MFA. It can be a difficult decision.

[nimda]

Art is absolutely necessary- or it has proved itself to be a necessity in human civilization.

 

If artists are not able to go to art schools or find good environments to define their purpose and profession; they can find themselves in a cycle of doubt about the feasibility of being an artist.

 

It sounds like you are asking - how could I be an artist if it does not guarantee the rewards of other jobs.

 

It would be very difficult to start or move through an MFA program without a deeper belief in the importance and viability of the pursuit.

 

 

 

 

 

[TheStranger]

It is both a luxury of time and money.  Even more so if there is no funding and if your time would be better (for any number of reasons) spent elsewhere. Depending on your long term desires, you have to decide whether it is a good use of your time and money.

I don't think this is a discussion particular to art and an MFA; what you have described is common to most dedicated learning situations.

I am an older student who home schooled—rather unschooled—four children and so I am a big proponent of both life (autodidactic)-learning  and life-long learning, but university has provided me (and my children) access to an environment of accelerated learning and intensity that I have recently enjoyed making use of. It has also given me access to ideas and people that I have been hard pressed to find elsewhere.

I dropped out of university when I was in my twenties because I wasn't capable of taking advantage of that particular situation at that particular time, neither emotionally, intellectually,  economically, nor in terms of family. School can be an incubator of ideas if used well. How long each person will benefit from it is an individual choice. Some never get that benefit for all kinds of reasons. Some would like it and should have the opportunity but don't, while others find that kind of intense environment elsewhere—school is not the only incubator of ideas / way to get an education or opportunity to challenge default thinking. I think the key is being able to find the intensity of learning that you're looking for wherever you can find it.

By all accounts education (including art education) is considered a luxury in every country that does't provide free access to higher education for everyone. Collectively, we don't really think it is worth the money necessary to make opportunities available at an institutional level to challenge the assumptions (both good and bad) that we absorb as we grow up.

It is difficult to change that kind of embedded devaluation. The thinking is something like "it wasn't there for us, so you'll have to earn it, or not, like we did, or didn't". There is no collective sense of the huge benefits to society that thoughtful, self-reflexive people provide, both socially and economically—not (just) in terms of production and earning power, as we usually like to frame it—but because more thoughtful, self-reflexive people make life better for everyone. Art education (in school or otherwise) is just one of the ways that we can challenge ourselves to be more thoughtful and self-reflexive.

That you are still checking in with this forum, TheStranger, seems to indicate that you might not (yet) have found the  situation that will help you do all in life and art you aspire to, and that in some ways you would still like to do an MFA. It can be a difficult decision.

 

I think you have a very mature view on the subject that I think comes with someone with your life experiences.  It is true ... really it all comes down to a choice, or a series of choices, and whether or not we have a strong enough aptitude to carry out things of difficulty...and to what degree.  I want to keep making art, but art school for me at this time would not be the wisest decision.  

 

 

Art is absolutely necessary- or it has proved itself to be a necessity in human civilization.

 

If artists are not able to go to art schools or find good environments to define their purpose and profession; they can find themselves in a cycle of doubt about the feasibility of being an artist.

 

It sounds like you are asking - how could I be an artist if it does not guarantee the rewards of other jobs.

 

It would be very difficult to start or move through an MFA program without a deeper belief in the importance and viability of the pursuit.

 

Yes, art is necessary for human civilization but I don't think art school is needed to purify oneself to the idea of being one with art, like a nun to a church.  I also think it is silly for artists to feel like they are servants to human civilization's progression in the arts.  Artists need to find time to make a living and spend time with loved ones but also do enough where they can make and exhibit their art.  I believe there is an important hierarchy and balance.  I used to try to justify why I was pursuing art as a career when I was in my undergrad..."art is necessary" or "I want to do something I'm passionate about for a living."  There are more choices and combinations of things that make more sense to each individual.  Doing what I want to do, having passion for something and living life beyond art can be three very separate things.  Anyway, I'm not going to ramble on...this is a grad forum after all and I used to be a die hard on here so I know I wouldn't care about this post if I read it 4-5 years ago.

 

As someone at my graduation said in a speech, the one true question you should think about: "Who are you without your passion for art?"