Wendy Angel: Comments

Art is a cause, not a result, of creativity.

Saying art is about creativity can harm a comprehensive understanding of art. When we clarify ways of thinking about art we may be able to tap the phenomenal potential that arts provide to learning methods.

The idea of creativity usually evokes the idea of imagination. Imagination may relate to art making; however no art exists in the realm of imagination. Art is made. It exists in physical form not in the immaterial world of ideas or imagination.

To be art something must be constructed. Even conceptual and ethereal art forms are tied to a manifestation or arrangement of material environment and/or stuff. A creative idea may motivate art making but it is not art in itself.

It helps to understand creativity in relation to innovation. The difference between the two ideas is that creativity focus on the mental process while innovation is more often tied to production. Innovation may be considered related to creative thinking, but goes beyond an idea into the working out of a product.

Art practice methods enable the learning of creative thinking. This is the opposite of what is sometimes imagined—  that art is the result of creativity.

The methods and processes making of art often precede some, if not all, ideas that eventually function as art content. Art content, the ideas stimulated by works of art that are based on experiencing the artwork, emerges throughout the art making process. This is particularly true of modern and contemporary art. It should be recognized that art making produces or enables creative or innovative thinking.

Although exact percentages vary, 2% inspiration 98% perspiration is a common cliché applied to the art making process.

There are so many ways that knowledge of the forms and functions of the arts inform and enable learning >>> Removing the arts from general education only makes sense if the intent is to promote ignorance.