Dawn Bonker
In case you haven’t already read about it in The Panther online or on the newly formed SAVE CHAPMAN ART Facebook page that has already attracted more than a thousand members: university administrators met with the art department and several deans of Chapman colleges on Tuesday to discuss the possibility of structural changes to the Art Department.
Of course, the moment that meeting ended, the rumors began to fly.
Students set up that Facebook page (you need to join the page to read the comments or to add a comment, so definitely join. Otherwise all you’ll see is the page administrator’s longish prelude…).
The Panther pounced on the story: http://thepantheronline.com/article.php?id=1789
And the hand-wringing and overreacting commenced.
From a lot of the comments, you would think it was a done deal; that Chapman had decided to throw art off the campus, lock, stock and barrel; let the bonfire of the vanities begin (where’s Savonarola when you need him?), and for God’s sake don’t let anyone take an art class any more.
Full disclosure here. I am an art person — I have my B.A. and M.A. in art history, took my fair share of studio art classes, and believe me, I am on board with the fact that the visual, performing and liberal arts are absolutely crucial to the university experience. If visual/studio art were really being eliminated from Chapman, I’d be with you in the protest march. (Well, maybe just in spirit, since I have to be the university spokesperson and I do like my job.) But the point here is that nothing has been decided yet. There are some very creative ideas that will keep visual art very much with us, and the ultimate decision may be better for everyone than everyone seems to think right now.
Facebook comments range from thoughtful to absolutely outraged, with some already planning what protests will be organized to SAVE CHAPMAN ART. Human chains through the campus! Public readings of letters of support!
In the interest of bringing things back to reality, though, we went to the top and talked with Chancellor Daniele Struppa.
Chancellor Struppa confirmed that the meeting was held at the request of the leadership of the College of Performing Arts to initiate discussions about the future of the Art Department — which currently exists within the College of Performing Arts — and its potential restructuring. Currently the Art Department offers degrees in studio art, art, art history and graphic design.
“Potentially — and this is only an idea at the moment – art and art history could go to Wilkinson College, and graphic design to Dodge College,” he said. “But this is only in the discussion stage right now; there are no set plans for anything.”
He added that while the studio art major could face elimination — “there are only 17 studio art majors out of the almost 4,000 undergraduates at Chapman right now,” he pointed out, which is a very low number even at a small university — that does not mean that Chapman would eliminate the teaching of painting, drawing, sculpture or photography. “There is a difference between the ‘major’ and the fact that we can still offer classes in these subjects,” he said. “The possible closure of the major would not eliminate opportunities for students to engage in these and a variety of other creative activities on campus.”
Dr. Struppa added that the studio art major has existed for many years, “and students have demonstrated by their choices that studio art is not a very high priority for them – unlike, for example, graphic design, which currently has nearly 100 majors. And at a university, one must listen to the students [as a company listens to its customers], and make decisions about where to make investments and where not to make them. Right now, by their enrollment, our students are telling us that the studio art major is very low on their list.”
Several innovative ideas are being floated, Dr. Struppa said, including a new major that might be called “visual creativity,” which could bring together an interdisciplinary engagement between the arts, the humanities and the sciences. “We think that some of these ideas will not only respect and encourage creativity, but also attract a larger body of students.”
Dr. Struppa wasn’t too surprised at the over-the-top reactions to a meeting that was only meant to kick off discussion and ideas. “For some reason we seem to live in a society where every change, or proposal for change, is always met with great resistance,” he said. “I think this is because people ‘know’ what they might be losing, but they struggle to imagine what could be gained. This often breeds hearsay, distress and wild rumors, which in most cases are unwarranted.”
The chancellor emphasized that he is always happy to meet with students or faculty to discuss their concerns, and he is very willing to talk about this issue. But he said, again, that no decisions have been made, and that administrators are merely in a conversation about the subject. That’s all. So everyone take a deep breath now.
This is a nice article, and it sounds very assuring. However, it’s hard to believe it’s a balanced perspective given that the writer is under the authority of the people who would most want to look good on this topic–the Chapman administration. It doesn’t seem likely that this is a neutral view on the topic. The fact that respected faculty who have poured their lives into teaching Chapman students for years are to be laid off, seems one reason to be disappointed in Chapman’s current plan. The fact that reports about the meeting seemed to suggest that it was going to happen, not that it was just an idea, seems disappointing as well. As a former art major and CU alum, I’m feeling let down by my alma mater right now.
It is very easy to be drawn into the knee-jerk “the administration must be all bad” fallacy. But how can you feel “disappointed” and “let down” when you don’t even know what is happening yet? One wonders why it’s always so difficult to engage in discussions of change – as a community — without accusations flying around about some kind of nefarious intent. You’d think the Chapman administration was meeting in some secret lair plotting the demise of the fine arts while they plan an arid campus full of business majors, bronze busts and steel-ball fountains.
I work with these folks all the time, and I can assure you that is not the case. (Athough the “secret lair” idea is pretty awesome…) Chapman’s administration is sensitive to students’ needs and they know and appreciate the immense value of the arts (why would we have a fantastic College of Performing Arts otherwise, or a burgeoning collection of fine contemporary art on campus?). They are interested only in looking at ideas and alternatives to help make things better for the students and the students’ futures. These discussions have just begun, at the request of the College of Performing Arts.
So why this has provoked accusations and outrage, instead of calm thoughtfulness and reasonable engagement in the discussion, is an interesting question. The fact is that NO ONE knows what will happen yet. Changes in a degree program — if there are to be any — must go through a long, careful and rigorous process, through plenty of committee discussion and plenty of opportunities for the community to participate and communicate. Nothing is decided without all of that.
By the way, if there actually were an initiative to remove art from Chapman – instead of what there really is, the beginning of a series of discussions as to the shape and form of art instruction here in the future — THEN I would be personally upset. I love the arts and the visual arts in particular – I have two degrees in art history and have taught it at the college level, in addition to working in my “spare time” (what a concept) as an artisan craftsperson. I would be leading the parade if I thought art were in danger at Chapman.
And here’s another pertinent question – why haven’t all these folks who are so “outraged” (at what?) attended past art events here at Chapman? I’m sure some have, but I’ve been to talks and openings that only a few current art students have even bothered to attend, let alone alumni in the area. Chapman students, as a whole or in their constituent parts, do not seem to be good attenders of events outside the classroom. It’s all so very easy to “gather” on Facebook and sit and click a few keys to express your views, but where were all these people when we had actual events here? It would have been very nice to have 1600 students attend. It would have been very nice to have 160 students attend.
Sometimes it would have been nice to have 16 students attend. Astonishing, really.
So here’s an idea — perhaps your best message to the deans and administration would be for everyone to show up at every single art-related event on campus from now until summer, and next year too, and the year after that. Show them by your participation that you really care. Put your actual involvement where your mouth is. Facebook is simple – so simple that no one really pays attention to giant Facebook groups any more. Actually going to events, lectures and gallery openings — now that’s a message that would be hard for anyone to ignore.
You love and appreciate Chapman art? Show it. Not just at one or two events, but from now on.
Honestly, the thing that puts me most on my guard against you and the administration is the tone of this “article”. Could you be any more patronizing and derisive?
Maybe the Chapman community at large would be more inclined to attend these wonderful art events if doing so didn’t simultaneously support snide writers and thoughtless administrators. Would it have killed the Chancellor and the folks involved in these decisions to have brought their concerns to the general public and asked the students (aka the most important people on campus) whether or not their worries were justified BEFORE even moving forward with internal discussions?
What faith does this potential catastrophe instill in the 50+ students enrolling in Chapman’s Studio Art Program this Fall? We’re shelling out hundreds of thousands of dollars to go to a school that can’t even keep the “arts” in its “liberal arts” manifesto? Oh, that’s right. Guess we need another fountain in place of our Studio Art program. Maybe they’ll even let us sculptors and painters do the designs for it as a last parting gift before our degrees become worthless to all potential employers! Golly gee, what a delight!
Before you start labeling us dissenters as “knee-jerkers”, maybe you should remove yourself from your bubble and consider whether or not you are doing a disservice to the readers you reach by posting flippant articles which do not present both sides of an issue in a fair way.
As we said in the article, there is no “potential catastrophe” because there is no decision yet on anything. And the chancellor has assured everyone who has bothered to discuss this with him that contrary to wild rumors, art will definitely continue at Chapman and yes, art and the arts will always continue here as a vital part of Chapman’s liberal arts mission.
I’m sorry if you construed my previous post as condescending. If anything, my frustration is with the rumormongers who have tried over the past several days to build this up into something that it definitely is not. The “knee-jerk” comment was in reference to the inclination of some students (alas, often egged on by rumors) to think the administration is always conspiring to remove beloved programs and people and build the next new plaza or big expensive building. In truth, this administration is no faceless bureaucracy; they are working hard, listening closely to what students want and need, and they are doing their best to help guide Chapman to a better future so your diplomas will become ever more valuable. Chancellor Struppa has indicated again and again his willingness to discuss last week’s meeting and the potential outcomes; he is willing to listen closely, his mind is open, and he has told us that NO DECISIONS have been made yet. The outcome of this story has yet to be written.