2009-07-09T16:22:00.000-07:00

Abstract

For an artist teaching early years, similarities between preschool activity and participatory art are obvious. Preschoolers and postmodern artists share similar concerns, of what Bourriaud cites as the relational. (2002) Thus two artworlds, if coincidentally, converge. The author is an early years teacher of seven years experience working at inner-London schools. In considering the practice of preschool artists, this essay reflects on observations of indoor and outdoor activity. Mark-making is reframed in its wider perception to include physical and cerebral journeying, as explored in the artworks of Francis Alÿs and Felix Gonzalez-Torres. The art of preschool extends into multiworlds of formative cognition. It mirrors the play-like manner in which artists explore and engage with social dialogue and viewer-response. The author uses the term playerism to define a permissive pedagogy supporting free-play and independent learning. This essay recommends progression in art education via the example of postmodern practice and its relevancy to the earliest stages of educative experience.

In the UK, preschool is defined as the Early Years Foundation Stage. The name also refers to the curriculum. The author uses the term preschool in reference to both nursery and reception year-groups, in conjunction with the term EYFS.

Introduction

Why coincident? Preschool artists practice by instinct, mostly unaware of the contemporary artworld. But coincidence affects opportunity and the two worlds are contingent to new learning. Lifeworlds of artists and children may differ but their artworlds are familial. World is defined as ‘the system of things; the present state of existence... activity; environment... a part, or a related group of parts...’ (Chambers Dictionary 1993) During the past academic year (2008-2009) I have explored different worlds of the same school in East London: one term each in Early Years (across Nursery and Reception classes), and separate terms as a Nursery and a Reception class teacher. In addition to children’s interaction with pigment-based media, I noticed an obvious art to their play. This has led me to consider: What is art for the very young? Or, what is visuality for the very young? By using the term visuality, I refer to children’s wide visual sensibilities: to the high levels of response they have for visual symbolism and the aesthetic. This builds to a unique personal repertoire, relative not only to sight-perception but also to environmental aspects including spatial and social awareness.

Visuality may be considered in relation to Berger as the accruement of visual language. (1972) This usually combines with identity choices based on environmental visual-ness and attendant self-image. This is in part defined by Foster as ‘how we see, how we are able, allowed, or made to see, and how we see this seeing and the unseeing therein…’ (In Rose 2006: 02) Visuality or, to make a Bergerist comparison, acquired visual repertoire, encompasses children’s interactions via sign or gesture. (Vygotsky 1979) It links to a sense that art in schools could take a wider view, outside regulatory curriculum norms (most often referencing two or three-dimensional media), and realign with the inclusive and participatory aspect of postmodern art. This may need further reconsideration if educationalists address any reinterpretation inferred by the children themselves. Participatory art essentialises self-assessment. It shifts emphasis from the artwork as an ‘authentic’ object (Kester 2004) to the viewer or participator as a player; to art as the played interaction therein. In these instances, visual evidence is often catalytic to the learning process; as opposed to fixed images being the focus or source. Simon Starling’s Shedboatshed (Turner Prize, London 2005) is one example that will be discussed later in the essay.

Postmodern is a loaded term. Kvale considers that ‘“Postmodern” does not designate a systematic theory of a comprehensive philosophy, but rather diverse diagnoses and interpretations of the current culture, a depiction of a multitude of interrelated phenomena.’ (1992: 32) Docherty defines postmodernism as ‘a “family resemblance” term... for things which seem to be related – if at all – by a laid-back pluralism of styles and a vague desire to have done with the pretensions of high-modernist culture.’ (In Honderich 1993: 708) Meanwhile, Peter Abbs views its pluralism not as complex but as over-simplifying the discourse of art. In his book Against the Flow Abbs resists the urge to be pulled-in by ‘a sense of irony towards experience...’ (2003: 05) Inferencing the postmodern as ‘a recognition of the broken nature of our experience’ (Ibid), he explains that:

My general position towards postmodernism is one of ambivalence: I endorse some of the relativist philosophy while postulating some universals and I distrust the protective irony which marks its sensibility. I am also conscious of the failure of most postmodernists to engage critically with some of the most urgent questions posed by a global consumer culture. (Abbs 2003: 05)

The types and constitutions of artworks I consider, in relation to preschool activities, present one facet of postmodernism. But facets are multiple in their function. Whilst I am generally sympathetic with Abbs, in ultimatum I defer from his view. The participatory element of postmodern art, the letting-in, nurtures debate; ‘engage[s] critically...’ (Ibid) This aligns with the ethos of the Early Years Foundation Stage that encourages children to ‘Select and use activities and resources independently.’ (DfES 2007: 12) My agenda is not to delve into the cause-and-effect of postmodernism; I use the term (together with postmodern, as particularly relating to participatory art) as a moniker for the here and now. Likewise, preschool is a convenient but contradictory title: it is in fact a form of existent and formalised schooling. Participatory is itself a wide-ranging term. It references social artworks for which individuals submit contributions (e.g. Don’t Box Me In, Museum of Childhood, London 2009) and physically-interactive installations such as Robert Morris’ Bodyspacemotionthings (Tate Modern 2009). For the latter, it could be considered that the individual is submitting their self or their action. For purposes of this essay, I choose no differentiation. I wish to include all varieties of participation on the art spectrum, high or low not greater or lesser.

Lyotard identifies postmodernism as ‘the state of our culture following the transformations which, since the end of the nineteenth century, have altered the game rules...’ (In Cahoone 2003: 259), and continues that ‘The decline of narrative can be seen as an effect of the blossoming of techniques and technologies since the Second World War, which has shifted emphasis from the end of action to its means...’ (Ibid: 264) To focus on the means and not the end is to enjoy the freedoms ‘The decline of narrative’ brings. (Ibid) So what may impede this? In response to the National Advisory Committee on Creative and Cultural Education’s All Our Futures: Creativity, Culture and Education report (NACCCE 1999), Craft et al consider that the ‘politics of creativity consists of an intricate network of dynamic forces, all impacting on the implementation of a new order of creativity in education.’ (2001: 29) Abbs, writing in 2003, is critical of a ‘bureaucratic educational system’ (2003: 02) as recognised by Atkinson in ‘the content, structure and organisation of school practices over the last century...’ (Atkinson 2002: 99) Abbs is wary of regulatory educational systems impeding on individualised learning; of an adult need to meaning-seek in opposition to a child need to meaning-make. Abbs counteracts this by asking ‘students who they are and what they wish to learn.’ (2003: 15) It is an excellent question for preschoolers. Instead of which, false-narratives are grafted onto preschool artworks; rendering them as evidence for assessment. Atkinson extenuates that ‘as pedagogical subjects both teachers and students are products of the specific historical discourses in which they function.’ (2002: 99) Indeed, adult annotation of infant drawings misses the point that transience is key for children’s art. As Kermode reminds us, ‘We interpret always as transients’ and that refers to adults and children alike. (1979: 145) Postmodernism is a model for the continual realignment of pedagogic identity, ‘a forever unfinished discursiveness...’

_

Coincident Artworlds of Preschool and Postmodern