Artists rock
Posted on 03-04-10 · Sassy Lawyer Tags: art, business, culture, educationBased on the feedback from readers, it appears that out of the 939 words in last Tuesday’s column, Depression and suicide, one short paragraph with no more than 74 words, stood out: “I see it everyday. Parents who push their children to do nothing but study, believing that outstanding academic performance is the only way to survive in the adult world, not realizing how they deprive their children of their childhood. I see it among teachers and school administrators who assign heavier school work than is necessary thinking that the only way for a student to find his true potential is to reach his breaking point.”
The plot thickens. It appears that children who are pushed to excel in academics as though it were the be-all and end-all of their young lives aren’t only being deprived of their childhood but of their chance at becoming happy and productive adults as well. And it seems that not only parents and teachers are guilty of this crime – the entire educational system is in it too.
A reader, Peter Banez, posted a link to a video of a talk delivered by Sir Ken Robinson on education and creativity (look for it on www.ted.com), encapsulated as follows: “Why don’t we get the best out of people? Sir Ken Robinson argues that it’s because we’ve been educated to become good workers, rather than creative thinkers. Students with restless minds and bodies — far from being cultivated for their energy and curiosity — are ignored or even stigmatized, with terrible consequences.”
Ken Robinson tells the story of choreographer Gillian Lynn who, as a child, seemed to lack focus, was always restless and underperformed in school. It was the 1930s and ADHD was unknown. Brought to a doctor who noticed how she just stood up and danced when the radio was turned on, he exclaimed that Gillian wasn’t sick but, rather, a dancer. He advised her mother to send Gillian to dance school where, to her delight, she found others like her who had to move in order to think. She went on to become a ballerina and, later, the choreographer for two of the most popular stage musicales of all time, Andrew Lloyd Webber’s “Cats” and “The Phantom of the Opera.” What would have happened, Sir Ken Robinson quipped, if the doctor had chosen instead to medicate Gillian to keep her quiet?
Why was Gillian Lynn’s extraordinary talent not discovered in a regular school? Sir Ken Robinson says it has to do with education, even as we know it today, being an offshoot of the industrial revolution. Education was fashioned to train workers for the bourgeoning labor market so who cared really about the creative potential of each child? Exploring creativity at the expense of making mistakes is not encouraged. Making mistakes, in fact, is punished and stigmatized. That’s why you FAIL when you give the wrong answers in a test. Make too many of them and you earn the label “bobo.”
If you’re a fan of Disney’s “National Treasure”, you might remember a line describing how Thomas Edison invented the light bulb: “I didn’t fail, I found 2,000 ways how not to make a light bulb; I only need to find one way to make it work.” Had he not succeeded on his 2001st attempt, Edison would probably still be a laughingstock today – a monumental failure. But imagine a world where his mere effort to keep on, mistake after mistake, would be lauded and applauded because he possessed such a tenacity to succeed in something he passionately believed in and loved to do. Sadly, in our reality, those who keep making mistakes get failing grades. If he’s a worker, he gets fired.
Education, therefore, is all about learning not to make mistakes in order to make it to the next academic level and, later, to land and keep a profitable job. To be even more precise, it is essential to learn not to make mistakes in areas that make a man a valuable commodity in the labor market – language and mathematics. It is quite all right to screw up in the non-essential fields – the minor subjects like the arts.
That should explain why, in education all over the world, Sir Ken Robinson says the hierarchy of subjects stays the same – the emphasis on language and mathematics, with arts at the bottom of the list. Even with the arts, he says there is a sub-hierarchy where art and music are given more importance than drama and dance.
And that really hit a raw nerve. From grade school throughout high school, the stage was my playground. Speech contests and glee club and, yes, even drama club (in grade school only), and my parents were encouraging. They attended competitions and performances, they spent for guitars and costumes, but by the time I was a senior and I announced that I was going to take up Theater Arts in college, I was met with shocked resistance. And what was I going to be? An actress? Clearly, to their minds, the performing arts were a great hobby and interest but nothing more.
It’s not that my parents were bad or stupid people. It’s just that they were both lawyers (aren’t they a narcissistic bunch, eh?) who belong to that generation that believes that education is, as Sir Ken Robinson put it so well, simply a stepping stone for landing a good job which really translates to becoming a professional with a white-collar job. If you really dissect that thinking, you have to ask: Is that all that childhood and youth are about – training to be a worker? There has to be more than that. LIFE HAS TO BE MORE THAN THAT. And, surely, the succeeding generations deserve better.
Now, I have two daughters who are in the same crossroad I found myself in many years ago. There was a time when my husband and I thought that they would both become lawyers (you should hear them argue their cases – sometimes, my jaw just drops) but one is a college freshman taking up Bachelor of Arts in Photography and the other will go into Film or Theater Arts or, maybe, even both. Those are the fields where they find they can best express their creativity, and their father and I are cheering them all the way.
Loading ...
I have also used Sir Ken Robinson in one of my entries. Sir Ken said, …’we were told that if you worked hard, went to college, and got a regular academic degree, you’d be set for life. Well, nobody thinks that’s true anymore, and yet we keep running our school systems as though it were’.
How many graduates do we have landed in a job totally different from what they have studied in school are there? We have placed too much emphasis on education that parents would skip meals, work doubly hard and make sacrifices just to be able to send their children to school. We graduate students by the thousands every year only to be misplaced not only because there is a lack for work opportunity but due to a mismatch of the market and what they have learned in school.
I have always been a believer that what we teach in school, no matter what the subject is, is to teach the individual to learn, discern, ssynthesize, etc. In other words, teaching him/her to THINK.
Education has become too formulaic that there’s no room left for creative thinking. Sad, really, unless we’re trying to train robots rather than thinking human beings.
“Education has become too formulaic that there’s no room left for creative thinking”.
It’s so true. I knew someone who graduated magna cum laude in college (accounting) but having a hard time coping in the real world. That is because she has a good memory and could memorized everything in the book but when the situation wasn’t in one of those 3-inch think college textbook that we used, she can no longer decipher how to tackle it. When I moved here to Canada and upgrade my education, I realized how spoiled Filipino students are. We were spoon-fed in school. Everything was taught in the classroom (at least in the schools where I studied). Our teachers work triply hard (and paid only a fraction) compared to teachers here. Canadian teachers teach the “general ideas” in the classroom and the specifics must be learned by the students themselves. I kinda hate it at first but I realized I developed my creativity that way. There’s mostly no wrong answer as long as you can depend your answer and convinced your audience that it is in accordance with the theories.
In most cities they have magnet schools – like high school level Juilliard, but including fine arts. Others put emphasis on sports. Or, be on the science team and draft designs for future modern conveniences. The common denominator? Guidance counselors. Professionals on the payroll who actually monitor student strengths and weaknesses, and direct them accordingly. Back when I was growing up in ‘Pinas, we didn’t have those. We didn’t even have a school nurse. Now that I think about it, these kids here don’t know how good they have it. And I’m starting to sound like a cranky old man. Sorry.
I think it’s also worthwhile to put up some time reading this one –
http://www.studentsforacademicfreedom.org/news/2751/hollywood-and-howard-zinns-marxist-education-project
A snippet -
““There is no such thing as pure fact,” Zinn asserts. Educators are not supposed to emphasize individual academic achievement. They are supposed to “empower” student collectivism by emphasizing “the role of working people, women, people of color and organized social movements.” School officials are not facilitators of intellectual inquiry, but leaders of “social struggle.” “
Carol B., to augment what formal education can’t provide, I think the best option is for everyone to consider himself a student all his life so that everyday is a chance for learning and self-improvement.
Jeng, there is National High School for the Arts in Makiling, Laguna (a project of Imelda Marcos) and a few science high schools. Problem with the National High School for the Arts is that it is a boarding school (how many parents will agree to have their 12-year-olds living away from home?) and it only accepts 40 to 50 students per year.
Trosp, I find that a bit extreme. I don’t think education should have socio-political agenda. Education is meant to open minds in every possible direction and dimension.
Sass,
Yes, you’re right. I’ve provided an example of how children are to be educated which could be to others are bit extreme and to the rests are a politically correct one or a creative way of educating the youth. It’s happening in majority of public schools in US of America.
I would still prefer to have schools that teach the traditional 3 Rs. There is no guarantee that teachers who will be allowed to deviate from this for the sake of creativeness would instead make use of this to forward their agenda. Teaching creativeness or values (or conditioning the minds) to children that is not aligned to their parents desire.
I would prefer to teach my children on how to be creative on learning the 3Rs. If that fails, then I would know something is wrong. Chances are I would know the problem first hand.
The way I see it, there are examples from commenters on this post which seems to me as exemption rather than the rule.
It’s just me.
Although I believe you have some valid concerns regarding parents who drive their children on a single dimension, to extend this to a condemnation of the educational system is not yet warranted. There are imporant policy questions here:
a) What should the goal of an educational system be in a developing economy, since the country and its people have limited resources?
How do we best arrive at a consensus on our education policy goals, since a large part of our population will, of course, want to lift the economic status of their kids and their families?
My sense is that your point of view is informed by your middle class background. Put yourself in the shoes of somebody in the lower income classes (farmer, laborer) who have to depend on public schooling, and who have to deal with the following (a) very little room for error in terms lifting their economic status; i.e. they have no savings, thus must derive an economic return when they become adults in a way that can help lift their quality of life; (b) extremely limited public sector resources.
Given that our first priority must be to lift the larger section of our population out of poverty, what should our educational priorities be, especially for the larger, poorer segments of our populatin, given the known and realistic resource limitations.
Re “Put yourself in the shoes of somebody in the lower income classes (farmer, laborer)…”
So you think that, to uplift their economic status, it’s more important to them to learn how to be workers/employees (via traditional education) rather than get access to real training, and financing, so that they can be independent entrepreneurs? I think not. I went to a public high school where 99% of the students were poor. More than 90% went to college (some didn’t even manage to pass NCEE, others got pregnant too soon, so they couldn’t), about half of that completed a degree. Among those that finished college, you’d think they’d be much better than their families were — financially — in high school. A small percentage, yes. The rest? Oh, they became employees, got married, had more kids than they could comfortably raise… and it’s a vicious cycle.
My children were products of LA public school system.When they were
at the grade school level(elementary)I volunteered to help at the school.
There were times that they assign me to the library.When I was given a tour of the library I was totally overwhelmed and I almost cried.
There were thousands of books,tools for learning,audio-visual aids
and computers that were available free for everyone.After school tutors
where provided if students need extra help in their school work.
There were programs for high achievers and slow learners.Students compete
in sports and musically inclined students were provided musical
instruments of their choice.I could go on and on.
Very fortunate children and yet they are not aware of it.And definitely
there shouldn’t be any reason for depression,right?
I’m so proud of Pinoys who inspite of strict upbringing and what they
call “spoon-fed” education, they have this innate “common sense” that
I don’t see in other people of different culture.
The story about the choreographer, Gillian Lynn is very interesting and I just couldn’t snap out of it. I can’t imagine how many people out there were in the same situation. I also can’t help but recall my father’s intervention when I was entering college that affected me so much. It was his dream for me to become a doctor and as a result, four years of pre-med became the worst years of my life and getting married early was the only way I know to get out. As soon as I got married, I switched to the course I wanted and have been working since as a Financial Analyst and loving every minute of it.
Re Gillian Lynn: It’s sad that, these days, when someone shows behavior that is out of the ordinary, the first thing people assume is that he’s ill, and the solution is medication. I think medication should be a last resort.
Glad you liked the video Connie. I also shared it with a couple of friends. The other day i got into a discussion about the way our children were being taught in school. Our kids go to different schools and it was evident that some value creativity more than others. I guess in the formative years a strong foundation on the basics is still the way to go however there should be a time when we are able to discover the interests of our kids and encourage them. As working adults regardless of profession, the question is if you are happy with what you are doing? Those who went after their dreams and achieved it are great examples.
If all people had a chance of living out their dreams, making careers out of their real passion, there would be no underachievers, I think.
P.S. Thank you! When you posted the link, I had a column due and I was already late.
Glad to help Connie!
Even in the US where there is defined path for artists and institutions dedicated to develop them, there is struggle to break into the profession, either from parents or from establishments.
Lady Gaga who played piano by ear (indicating talent) at age 4 was set to join the Juilliard School at age 11 but instead went into the Convent of Sacred Heart (Catholic school) as the eldest of Catholic Italian American parents. At age 17, she again reacquired traction by early admission into New York University’s Tisch School of Arts to study music and songwriting skills but found it too slow to where she wanted. She dropped out and joined the established Def Jam Studio at age 19. In just 3 months, she dropped out again since she could not fit into the set. She also moved out from her parents house (she said her dad just didn’t get it), assembled her own team and the rest is history (she won multiple awards in 2009).
Salma Hayek as rich daughter of an oil company executive (devoutly Catholic) is destined to have a bright future. She was enrolled at (US) Louisiana’s Academy of the Sacred Heart. She was an accomplished gymnast aspiring to compete in Olympics but the Mexican father prevented her from joining the Mexico team. She was ejected by the nuns from catholic school citing behavioral problems. She was sent back to Mexico to continue study and took up international relation to satisfy her parents. To defy her parents, she married early and dropped out to pursue a career that she wanted -being an actress. She landed roles in Mexican TV and films. But that was not enough for her, so she went to Los Angeles and took up the oddjob of being a waitress at one restaurant at Malibu. There she found her break when she met a couple producers and gave her the star role in Desperado opposite Antonio Banderas. Now, she is the CEO of her own film company.
Oh my goodness. And I thought Lady Gaga was just another weirdo. LOL Should keep reminding myself not to judge a book by its odd cover.
One thing that struck me in your two examples — seems that Catholic upbringing does limit options.
It seems that way, coz parents put their kids in Catholic school for faith, discipline and academics rigors. Most kids would do just fine and have no problem finding their compass. I attended a music rehearsal at one Catholic school and this 12 yr old with excellent vocal, played her guitar, made a beautiful rendition and stunned the audience when she told us she wrote the song. But misunderstood kids express rebellion by behavior problems to oppose parents wishes. Unfortunately, that is the nature of artists when pressed into one direction not of their own. Artists will always find their way, one way or another.
Lady Gaga is well known for her strange outfits, saucy interviews and wacky behavior which Ryan Seacrest revealed during an interview draws the audience to her bizzare songs. It is savy business, if one has to recall where Madonna (ex Catholic) started, which is kind of subtle compared to Madonna’s antics in “Like a Prayer” which drew the heaviest criticism.
There are plenty of Catholic artists out there – Britney Spears, Christina Aguilera, Mariah Carey, Heather Graham, Eva Mendes, Denise Richards, Fergie of Black Eyed Peas, Nicole Scherzinger of PussyCatDolls, Anne Hathaway, Gwen Stefani, Tina Fey, Eva Longoria, model Adriana Lima, Jennifer Lopez, Nicole Kidman, Penelope Cruz, Katie Holmes, etc. The last three shared life with Tom Cruise, an ex-Catholic seminarian. Strange, huh?
The strangest of all is a Filipina who went into Catholic exclusive school in San Francisco and turned out a rebel. I met her at defunct Yehey forum and appeared in 2 songs of Black Eyed Peas. After defending her against forum attackers, she invited us at annual LA convention which I never did. Unfortunately, that was extreme when I think of Catholic upbringing seems to limit options. Charmane Star is an adult film actress. Her parents were truly devastated.
Not only that, Salma Hayek who is beautiful and very talented was highly sought out by bachelors. She married (her second) a French billionaire.