A Deleuzian/Guattarian reading of art A Level teaching

Abstract

What kind of art is being taught in the Art A level syllabus? Is the current syllabus hindering the emergence of artistic thinkers? We can safely say that the A-Level Art syllabus leans towards the artistic norm: a linear education, but, in my opinion, only part of what art truly is. There seems to be a lacuna in history of art where contemporary art is concerned and certain radical artists are completely absent from the syllabus. Yet exposure to contemporary art would give completeness to the education of our students. For wasn't Monet a radical in his own time? Did not the newness of Impressionism provoke argument? However, today Monet is considered a Master. His radicalism has been accepted and his works are now not only accepted but sought after. Therefore, how can we say that young students know art when chunks of it are left out? If we deny the education of art as a whole, we are also questioning what art in itself is. Why is transgression, the 'dark side of art' - the pivotal point in each artistic period - being ignored at 'Art A level standard? The point of a 6th form art option is to distance itself from secondary level and make the students want to become future artists. It is important that students are given the full spectrum of art. The answers from my research confirm the need for a better relationship between the old and the new. The illustrations before every chapter are my own.