Young Children's Philosophy of Art as a Reflection of Culture and Society:A Three Point Perspective

Journal of Taiwan Normal Universi可 Humanities& Social Science 1997, Vol.位 (NewVersion), 29-42

Young Children's Philosophy of Art as

A Reflection of Culture and Society:

A Three Point Perspective

Dr.

Ann Cheng Shiang Kuo Fine Arts Department

National Taiwan Normal Universi句

This presentation focuses on phi1osophy of art as a reflection of lived experience of young chlidren who early in life shape their conceptions of art 姐 response to the 叫做alclimate and heritage of soci-eties in which they grow Up. Discussion of chi1dren's philosophy of art is here powered by results of a crosscultural, collaborative study, that involved interviews with four and five-year-old children 旭 C缸Iada， France, and Taiwan, probing their understanding of the concept of art and selected criteria 也at deter-mine membership of objects in the art categ，。可﹒ Resu1tsof the study are presented in the context of cultural heritage and tradition of the three societies and further support the need to carefully consider ωltural perspectives in disωssing， assessing, and evaluating art. The evidence of chlidren as young as four years of age having developed, through enculteration and social mediation of common values and understandings, their conceptions of art, underscores the importance of quality art education in early childhood years as a means of assisting children 垣 furtherdevelopment of their phliosophy of art. keywords: Creativity Children's beliefs

Development Art Education

Nature of Art Structural Interview Question Cognitive

As we gather at an lnternational Congress of art educators two things bring us all together: ∞n­

cern about education of young people and concern about the arts, their value and role in our respec-tive societies. This morning's address will focus on the understanding of art as a category that defines,

to a large extend, the nature of our profession and provides foundations for our engagement in educ-tion of childern around the world.

When we want to consider the categ。可 of art in terms directly 叩plicable and useful to art educa-tor~ (rather than art historians，創口iti臼， or busi-ness people, for example), we need to recognize that: a) art is an open ∞n臼pt (meaning that it re-quires divergent rather than convergent approach in seeking its understanding); b) art is a changing category (meaning that as a concept it undergoes serious redefinition with time); c) art is a social category (in that it reflects as well as expresses and defines societies); d) art is a cu1tural category (meaning that it is defined within and functions in close relationship to specific cultural contexts); and

e) art is a living category (in the sense 也at 扯 is de-fined through both concepts and conceptions).

ln the context of INSEA

,

when we talk about

art education in not just local but also global terms,

to what extent do we take under account the exis-tence of there 5 categories and the possibility and significance of multiple interpretatiohs to our dis-course? While Weitz's definition of art (1956) as an open concept dependent on context and continu-ously changing with time 。在'ers considerable sup-port in addressing this dilemma

,

it does not solve the pragmatic question faced by art teachers in -J:..p~ir daily practice: what and about what they sh

Òù

ld teach and what understanding of art should guide their classroom interventions?

ln times when we are tuned more than ever to the issues of globalization, mu1ticulturalism, and the need to approach generalizations with caution due to the potential of a cu1tural bias, a forum such as INSEA provides a particularly relevant place for re-visiting the question of philosophy of art and its implications to art pedagogy. If we wish