Post-Modernism, Economic Collapse and the Search for Value in Art

In Arts & Consciousness we have always taught our students that art is intrinsically valuable. We haven’t emphasized the commercial aspects of art, but have instead focused on art’s connection to self-affirmation, health, cultural identity and spiritual truth. We have proceeded from the assertion that if these things are adequately achieved, then money will be received by the artist as a natural and inevitable result of having created new value in the world. We teach students that this is the essence of creative process as well as development of a career in the arts. The amazing financial success of several A&C alumni suggests that money follows value rather than the reverse. Without compromising themselves, artists are beginning to understand that once connection and meaning is a part of one’s artistic search, that material abundance – wealth – is a natural consequence. There are, of course, many alumni who still struggle to earn a living and whose artwork has not yet achieved that important level of ‘connection’ that renders it ‘valuable’ by the community at large. Like enlightenment, the search for meaning and value is long and sometimes elusive.

Throughout most of the modern era attaining wealth through art was associated by many artists with the cynical manipulation of value and meaning by a corrupt and materialistic power structure which used art as a means to broker power and prestige. The avant-garde considered financial success a sign of disgrace; a moral failure by artists who, if virtuous, would eschew material success in order to reach new levels of spiritual, social and cultural innovation. The idea of exploring the nature of value through conceptual art has its origins in that early modernist avant-garde. The Dada artist Marcel Duchamp began the exploration of ‘meaninglessness’ with his landmark ‘ready-mades’ in the early 20th century. His assertion that even mundane objects must be seen as art if offered, un-altered by the artist, as a ‘significant’ art work, was revolutionary concept. It remains an important canon of contemporary art.

'Fountain’, 1917, Marcel Duchamp (‘ready-made’ sculpture)

Those who lived up to the avant-garde ideal of rejecting financial success were, of course, rarely heard from again and those who populate our art history books almost invariably (contrary to popular belief) achieved remarkable wealth and acclaim during their lifetimes. By mid-20th Century and the advent of Pop Art, the art of post-modern ideology, artists began to explore the concept of art and value as an important leitmotif of artistic expression. Artists, like Andy Warhol, actively sought financial wealth as a sign of ‘celebrity’ which they often equated with cultural value.




Everything was questioned and all foundations of meaning were challenged. Ironic self-deprecation replaced idealism and revolutionary zeal as the central theme of contemporary art. Breaking the rules became a central requirement for ‘good’ art. But as all the old rules of art were broken into smithereens, the avant-garde was forced to increasingly esoteric and obscure philosophical assertions in order to justify its own existence. These obscure sources of artistic content became increasingly inaccessible to the public but concomitantly attractive to wealthy collectors and art world insiders who desired membership in ‘the cultural elite’. By the late 20th Century, the art world had fully embraced art that asserted the premise that meaninglessness and absurdity were the only appropriate responses to a culture which had lost all connection to its own sources of meaning and authenticity . 'Soup 1', Andy Warhol 1968

At the beginning of the 16th Century there were still many distinct and isolated cultures on planet Earth. By the 20th Century, most tribal cultures and entire civilizations in the pre-European Americas had been eradicated. After the great wars of the twentieth century, cultural competition had become a relatively simple matter of East and West. The East was communist and repressive and the West was free and capitalistic – bizarre oversimplifications that sustained art and artists for nearly a century. In the era of post-Marxist, ‘late capitalism’ (post-modernism), the art world became obsessed with the futility of meaning itself. The remnants of the 20th century capitalist power structure went into a self-cannibalistic frenzy of sub-prime mortgages and leveraged hedge funds. As the world economy was super-heating at the end of the 20th Century, the art world was seized by conspicuous displays of power and wealth in response to artworks which were intentionally created to be devoid of meaning and content – now seen by the ‘well-informed’ as obsolete concepts. Where once artworks were purchased discreetly in the fashionable galleries of Paris and New York, art by the end of the 20th Century was being sold for hugely inflated prices in heavily publicized public venues such as auction houses or on-line purveyors of the world’s smartest art.

Damien Hirst, a British artist in his mid-40’s recently held an on-line auction of a wide variety of his own artworks that fetched a record smashing $200 million. The auction was intended as an artwork in itself. Even more significant than this extraordinarily high price, is Hirst’s assertion that the value of an artwork is an integral aspect of its artistic content, since this signifies the work’s relevance to the art world. Hence, collectors and art dealers become intentional collaborators in the artist’s work. The inflation rate for the art world’s ‘super-stars’ had become astronomical by the early part of the 21st Century, with even relatively obscure artists who were in favor selling artworks for over a million dollars. Collectors and dealers like the infamous Larry Gagosian began to view themselves as collaborators and participants in conceptual artwork which was explicitly about absurdly inlflated prices mediocre artworks and the manipulation and control of a cynical and bored art-collecting 'elite'. By the early 21st century, the art world had come to embody all that was worst about late capitalism - greed, arrogance, manipulation and excess in all things.










Damien Hirst, 2008: Untitled image from on-line auction ‘Beautiful Inside My Head Forever’

The underlying issue seems to be a larger questioning of the nature of ‘value’ itself. The express intent of artists like Hirst, Jeff Koons, Lisa Yukusavge and Chris Ofili is precisely this. Why would Ofili’s elephant dung paintings be deemed to be valued in the millions? The cynical answer is clearly that wealth and power has believed that it has the ability to arbitrarily assign value to valueless-ness. It is, perhaps, a debatable point but current economic events suggest that this presumption may have been disproven. The reasons for the trend towards absurd over-valuation of art seem to be closely linked to the reasons for the recent international financial calamity that has in recent months sent stock prices plunging and un-employment rates through the roof. The art world’s over-reliance on financial capital as a signifier of meaning, paralleled the attitudes and actions of world financial markets in their tendency to grossly over-value inherently worthless investments. The world of finance, like the art world, fell into the catastrophic belief that any investment is a good one if enough capital is thrown at it. In both cases, money was invested in demonstrably unsound products – think, Damien Hirst = sub-prime mortgages.

One of post-modernism’s main themes is the de-construction of ‘meaning’ (and therefore value) as an artifact of unreliable ‘structures’ such as language, symbols or ritual. The basic thread of Post-Modernist thinking is something like this: If meaning is based on culture, and culture is based on language, and language is intrinsically unreliable and always controlled and manipulated by a greedy and corrupt power structures, then culture, meaning and value all become illusions – infinitely manipulable artifacts of the power structure’s on-going demand for control. The art world’s ceaseless desire for a new and marketable concept requires new art-stars in increasingly spectacular settings made more conspicuous by astronomical prices paid for their work in order to assure the power structure that it still has control – that money is everything after all!

Some cotemporary artists are now examining a new kind of value – value that is related to interconnectedness, happiness, wisdom and health. This is the central; theme of numerous writings about the ‘end of art’ from relatively recent art world apostates such as Donald Kuspit, Suzi Gablik, Lynn Gamwell and Arthur Danto. As the world’s economic crisis undermines the foundations of the ‘old’ power structure, we can look to new directions in art as a pathway to expanded cultural consciousness and a return to value and abundance based on new and more positive cultural assumptions like inter-connectedness and sustainability.

The current situation in the art world, the economic world and the world political scene seems to be one of profound change – the long hoped-for ‘paradigm shift’. We may have seen it ushered in by the presidential inauguration on January 20th. When the recovery from the current crisis occurs, it seems possible that the world will re-discover the value of art as an essential part of culture – not as a coveted object but as living and breathing part of everyday life. The economic and political worlds seem to have little choice but to re-construct their structures based on a more sustainable and longer-term vision that includes human well-being and environmental awareness as key tenets for the future. In a sense not only America but the whole world voted for these changes in the symbolic form of the new American President. The emergent cultural vision seeks an integration of art, wellness and sustainability that is counter to former assumptions about value and power. In short, the power structure seems to be changing. The 20th Century ‘s emphasis on religion, nationalism, militarism and material wealth are yielding quickly to new cultural imperatives – the environment, social and economic inter-dependence, human rights and the individual search for meaning and happiness outside of culturally proscribed institutions. The emergent vision seems to understand that real value is based on connection and embodiment rather than military strength and coercion. We are all at a unique historical moment – the moment that the ebb of modernist materialism is replaced by a new flood of broadened cultural and spiritual awareness – a new era of expanded consciousness. To refer to this new consciousness as ‘spiritual’ is perhaps too limiting. In Holistic Studies we use the term frequently, but we as a culture are on the brink of a wholesale return to something more all encompassing than ‘spirituality’ per se. Perhaps the world is discovering that spirit cannot be separated from the physical or emotional dimensions of existence of identity.

Andy Goldsworthy – Elm Patch 2002 installation with colored leaves

The current re-emergence of ‘spirituality’ in art is based on direct experience rather than religious ideology. The new art exemplified by artists such as Andy Goldsworthy Kiki Smith, and Bill Viola (all of whose artwork also sells for astronomical amounts) is connected to a direct experience of nature and embodiment – an intrinsic value which other artists of the current generation may admire but still reject as unexciting and sentimental. We must all choose for ourselves which is the more desirable motif in art. There is a lot to discover in the contemporary art world.

In Arts & Consciousness we are developing a new pedagogy – a way of teaching artists to discover meaning and connection through the creative process. By examining the ideas of modernism and post-modernism our students find their own new ideas and new ways of offering relevance and value to a culture starved for authenticity and humanity. We hope they will discover abundance as a natural consequence of finding relevance and value in their own artwork. The on-going exploration the nature of value and meaning is an important part of contemporary art. Often misunderstood as opportunism, the excesses of the contemporary art world have laid the groundwork for a new revolution in art and the re-discovery of a deeper and more enduring value for the entire culture. We have reason for celebration and hope in the face of adversity and can find beauty and wisdom in a myriad of new images and ideas that are re-shaping art and culture.

Balancing Perspectives

I have waited for many years to be included in an exhibition that explores the influences of East Asian artistic and philosophical traditions on contemporary art. So, I when I was contacted by the de Young Museum’s Community Outreach Office to co-curate a satellite exhibition in response to their ‘Asian/American/Modern Art: Shifting Currents’ exhibition, I suggested this ‘Balancing Perspectives’ as a response to their show. I was honored to be invited to participate in a curatorial discussion regarding a topic in which I have been passionately interested for decades. ‘Shifting Currents’, at the de Young, examines Asian artists who worked and exhibited in America between1900 and 1970. The show includes numerous styles and approaches but all are the work of ethnically Asian-American artists including Chiura Obata, Carlos Villa, Ruth Asawa, Dong Kingman and Isamu Noguchi are examined as a cultural phenomenon despite the extreme range of artistic and cultural influences in their work. In response to this excellent show of Asian artists, I suggested a show that explored the nature of ‘Asian Art’. After some discussion with the de Young’s representatives, we decided to limit this to artwork completed by students, alumni and faculty of Bay Area Art Programs and to influences specific to East Asian cultural tradition – China, Korea and Japan as opposed to South Asian or ‘Middle Eastern’ traditions. The show would offer a counter point to the ethnically focused ‘Shifting Currents’ show by considering what it means to be an Asian artist as opposed to an artist influenced by Asian Art. We would create a series of events centering around an exhibition in the Arts and Consciousness Gallery at JFK University in Berkeley. A call for entries was widely distributed and we were overwhelmed by the number and quality of the responses. Artists from many different levels of experience and perspective were included. Many ethnicities and cultural backgrounds were present among the artists included in the Balancing Perspectives show which included artists from nearly every Bay Area art program.

The opening night of the Balancing Perspectives exhibitions at the JFKU Berkeley Campus included performance artists, writers, and videos that were influenced by East Asian art. The central exhibition in the A&C gallery included works in a wide variety of media. The event was very well attended and included artists and students from all over the Bay Area. Funding for the opening night was provided by Bank of the West and donations of refreshments were made by Trumer Pils and Whole Foods. The organization of this gala event was made possible through the unstinting hard work of a variety of people from JFKU as well as from the de Young and its community outreach affiliate, ArtsReach.com.

The week after the opening, a symposium was held at JFKU to discuss the issues of East Asian Art as a growing influence in international contemporary art. A list of notable artists and scholars gave presentations that discussed particular aspects of the topics.

Peter Rojcewicz PhD, Dean of JFK University School of Holistic Studies, discussed the ‘Ancient Chinese Art of Living’ – the idea of self-transformation as the key element of Chinese tradition and a part of the ‘everyday aesthetic of life. Ideas of alive-ness and social inter-connectedness were discussed as leading to the cultivation of ‘cheng’ – sincerity. Connections between creativity and the flow of nature were discussed . Dr. Rojcewicz emphasized the legacy of harmony and balance from East Asian tradition as well as the centrality of the development of harmonious interactions with nature and society.

Prof. Mark Levy PhD, from Cal State East Bay discussed East Asian notions of emptiness and their importance in contemporary art. His own experiences in meditative practice led to an eloquent discussion of how the idea of ‘nothingness’ is revealed in a variety of art works from both the East Asian and Western traditions. Taoist, and Buddhist concepts of the void were explored in the art works of contemporary artists.

Fred Martin, noted Bay Area artist and art-writer, discussed the influences of Chinese tradition in his own artwork and creative process. He discussed his own artworks which were included in the exhibition as well as many others completed during his travels in China over the past two decades. Martin explained how his experiences of the natural world – and his travels through China connected him to the Chinese landscape tradition and the paradox of ‘place’ as timeless and constantly changing. As he spoke I realized that Fred embodies the Chinese literati (wen-ren) tradition that Peter Rojcewicz had implied in his earlier talk on ‘ren; as a notion of inter-connected social and spiritual existence which in the self-aware being, is constantly developed and cultivated creating inner and outer harmony. A complete transcript of Fred Martin’s presentation at the Symposium is available on his website: ttp://www.fredmartin.net


Kaleo Ching and Elise Dirlam Ching, artists, health workers and author of the ‘Faces of Your Soul’ and ‘Chi and Creativity' gave a presentation on the relationship between art and their practice of qigong and other body-centered creative practices. Their interest in art as a healing practice was examined along with an interwoven practice of Chinese medical techniques and concepts as well as its connection to indiginous wisdom and native Hawaiian spiritual practice. The essence of the Ching’s presentation was that art is about the transmission of energy in many forms. This energy has the power to heal and transform – an accepted part of ancient Chinese cultural practice which seems to have receded in recent times but is now an important part of understanding cross-cultural issues in art. The Chings led the Symposium is a series of body exercises aimed at increasing awareness of chi and its effect on physical wellness.

Jaqueline Baas, Curator emeritus of the Berkeley Mart Museum and author of ‘Smiles of the Buddha’ and ‘Buddha Mind in Contemporary Art’ spoke of Buddhist ideas of self-realization. Dr. Baas referenced Western artists whose work explores the Buddhist idea of enlightenment in all its forms. She offered a contextualization of Buddhist ideas on the idea of knowing and its history in the American art establishment.

William T. Wiley, one of California’s leading artists was then interviewed by Dr. Baas as images of his work were shown. Their conversation explored more subtle influences on his work by Zen and other East Asian concepts. Wiley’s print ‘Shadow of the Whip’, included in the show, was discussed at length. Wiley’s references to East Asian tradition were mostly oblique and he suggested that one of his main connections to Asian Art was through his teacher, Fred Martin. The natural connection to ideas of emptiness and the use of humor as a way to jolt the viewer into higher awareness were examined.

When the show was finally installed, and the opening celebration and symposium were both acclaimed as successes, I felt as sense of great relief. I walked back thorough the show where the real answers to the question of East Asian influence in contemporary art lie embedded in the work of 40 artists from many races and points of view. Having spent many years studying East Asian art and ideas, I felt a sense of kinship with all of the art and artists in the show. It was gratifying to see that my own affinity for East Asian artistic ideas and their applicability to modern and post-modern agendas was shared by so many gifted and committed artists. I was astounded by the range of influences represented in the show. Some works made specific reference to Chinese of Japanese images where others made only tangential references. Some works were playful and engaging – other more cerebral and philosophical. Going through the exhibition, though, one perceives a sense of flow. Most of the works exhibit an un-self-conscious sense of harmony and balance that reflects uniquely East Asian origins of energy expressed through human touch. Even photographs seemed to move and evolve in harmony with the viewer and the subject. Balancing Perspectives achieved everything I had hoped. We found a common excitement and relevance in the often forgotten or marginalized ideas of East Asia and a new paradigm for the future in which harmony and balance return to art as well as everyday life. In a time where identity is understood increasingly through direct experience rather than the adherence to pre-existing cultural roles and perspectives, the art of East Asia appears in a new light. As the whole world is struggling to re-invent meaning and culture the effortless low and harmony with nature, embodied by East Asian tradition brings a new sense of relevance and a renewed vitality to art and offers new perspectives of impermanence and interconnection.

Transformative Arts; Mind, Body and Spirit

It comes up a lot. The term 'transformative arts' was made up by a group of faculty in JFK University’s Department of Arts & Consciousness about thirty years ago. Jack Weller, one of the inventers of the term, is still around and very active. He was trying to re-define art therapy, at the time and he and his colleagues thought to call art ‘transformative’. Jack now is Director of the Expressive Arts Therapy Program at California Institute of Integral Studies in San Francisco. Ironically the term Jack initially intended as an extension of ‘art-therapy’ now stands somewhat opposed to the entire concept of art as psycho-therapy and instead represents an entirely new way of thinking about creative process and its relationship to health, wellness and social change. Transformative Arts, as we define in A&C today, is a rather radical notion. It is meant to suggest that art is, at its essence, about change. We often define art has having (or lacking) energy, but rarely think to consider the relationship between the creative energy that is used to conceive and fabricate an artwork and the meaning of the word ‘energy’. This hopelessly overused word simply describes a potential for work – a quantifiable potential to create change; no energy – no work; no work - no change. With the use of the term ‘creative energy’ we are really acknowledging that change is the inevitable result of creativity. It seems impossible to conceive of creativity without change.

Creativity, by most definitions, exists in the pursuit of some change – a better mousetrap, a break in the routine that makes us feel freer and happier, an un-blocking of old and obsolete ways of doing things that let’s us get the job done, a painting or a symphony that makes us weep with joy. If we’re being creative, we’re transforming things, and if there’s transformation going on, creative forces are certainly at work. Creativity and transformation are not by any means limited to what humans do. Nature is hugely creative – the very model by which we understand the concept of creativity. Plate tectonics is the creative force behind the formation of continents; sex is the creative force behind the formation of new animals – the ‘pro-creative act’ is associated with animals at all levels of complexity from amoebas to great whales. Creativity in nature and creativity in animals is all unconscious, at least we presume so. When humans become creative, we bring something new to the practice – intention. We create new things on purpose. We do it to make our lives better, because it’s fun, because it connects us to nature – to all creative forces and all beings. We’ve always created new things to make life better in some way or another. Always. We also understand something about creativity that other animals do not – that all forms of creativity (human or not) are linked to all other forms of creativity.

It works like this: if we start from the knowledge that all things are inter-related (the one thing upon which virtually all world religions (faiths) agree), we assume a kind of balance in the universe – everything bouncing along off of everything else in a regular and stable way. Creativity, by bringing something new into existence, creates a temporary imbalance until the universe can figure out what new things get to bounce off which other things. In essence, if we change anything inside a complex system, we automatically and irrevocably change everything in that system. It turns out ultimately there’s really only one system – and it’s really, really big. Most creative acts lead to small changes – imperceptible transformations. But big or small, creativity always changes things.

‘Transformative art’ sounds at first like a pretty grandiose term; like we’re going way beyond the merely ‘creative’ into the ‘TRANSFORMATIVE’. But it’s really not so grand at all. We might use ‘creative art’ – or ‘expressive arts’ – interchangeably with ‘transformative art’ except for one important distinction. ‘Creativity’ and ‘Expression’ are both terms that imply singularity; I am creating (even if I am part of a creative team). I am expressing (even if I am expressing a social reality). But, when I say ‘I am transforming’, there is an immediate ambiguity that both implies a dynamic connection between myself and something else, as well as a change in myself. Implicit in the word, ‘transform’, is the idea that I am changing because of my creativity at the same time as I am changing something else. The idea of 'art' isn't necessarily realted to creeativity as we generally suppose. One way to look at it might be as 'self-expression' which requires cretivity in order to be really effective, but there's plenty of self-expression that isn't really creative -- not innovative or authentic, but merely a recitation of what already exists. Expression doesn’t have much to do with changing things. It’s really just something I do for myself or at best in an effort to communicate something about myself. ‘Creativity’ implies only the potential for change, but ‘transformative’ means an imminent kind of non-dualistic change – changing the inner and the outer simultaneously. Transformative Arts is a term which simply points out that the function of art is change – if it’s ‘good’ art then the change is valuable in some way and if it’s ‘bad’ art, then things might change, but not in a way that is of value. Art can really only be valued by its transformative capacity.

The term ‘Expressive Arts’, is almost entirely associated with a particular multi-modal practice of art-psychotherapy. It implies the same limitation that conventional psychotherapy is now addressing in the exciting new genres of transpersonal, somatic and integral psychotherapy. ‘Expressive Arts Therapy’, however, seems to imply that the healing value of the ‘creative act’ exists only for the expressive gratification of the creator – that they do it by and for themselves with the help of the therapist in order to solve a personal problem. Transformative Arts avoids any connection to the word ‘therapy’. It is not therapy – not an intervention into ‘pathology’, but a means to discover and embrace a new relationship between creativity and wellness through the conscious connection to ‘the other’. ‘Transformative’ art is inexorably related to creativity’s basic function of creating connection. It is this inter-subjective feature of art that ultimately elevates it to a mystical act – a transcendence of individual mind and body into a larger and more fully integrated Self. Transformative art in this context implies that art’s innate ability to create multivalent connections between people, rather than mere personal expression, is the healing force behind the creative act. When we get connected, we realize that the pathological self isn’t part of that connection, though it might influence the nature of our relationship to others. When a connection is made through art, it happens at a deep level – our ‘essential’ selves where we’re innately healthy and free of pathology. Many artists spend lifetimes trying to find that deep connection. Transformative Art implies that art is the search for truth and wholeness, discovered through the creation of healing connection. Art requires the discovery of essence.

There are lots of way to get connected. Physical connection is obviously the most prevalent and most easily understood. Creative and compassionate physical connection includes, shaking hands, rubbing noses, play, sex, dance, caress, hugs and other forms of intimate touching. Physical dis-connection is commonly understood as 'fighting' – the struggle to become dis-connected, to establish boundaries, to punish, to exercise control. Fighting is associated with fear and rage; compassionate physical connection is associated with love. They are opposite forces but may be equally creative. In Transformative Arts, the underlying energy (potential for change) is love – or compassion. Rather than intending only personal gratification through the creative act, the transformative artist understands, guided by a sense of love and compassion, that true creative self-expression is a always a gift to others -- one way or another.

In the training of transformative artists here in Arts & Consciousness, the introduction of the idea that art is always a gift to the world adds the transformative dimension to the creative act. It is ultimately not creativity or art that heals, but loving connection. It is not the simple cathartic act of expressing oneself that transforms, but the reception of that creative energy by others. At the same time, the creator, finding a loving and compassionate connection, receives the gift of being recognized and affirmed. In the witnessing of the creative act, viewer and artist are both transformed. We try to teach this form of witnessing through critique. It’s not the old critique – not the negative judgment-based practice of following a proscribed set of rules (formalism). That most familiar, traditional form of critique is spiritually the opposite of ‘transformative’ -- it is ‘conform-ative’, though it often pretends to be creative. In A&C, critique starts with an acknowledgement of everyone’s right to be seen and to be taken seriously as artists. It is a process of honest witnessing in which judgment is replaced by reception. Challenge is still present, but in the form of inquiry rather than attack. ‘Why have you done it this way?’, rather than ‘You shouldn’t do it that way.’ opens dialogue and connection rather than closing it down. If connection is the ultimate function of art – at least the transformative kind – then critiques must strengthen rather than destroy connection. This is one of the most important pedagogical strategies in our program.

Transformation also implies limnality. It is always at the edges of things that change occurs. In learning to understand ourselves as transformative artists, we seek the edges -- the point where things connect. It can be seen as a portal – a doorway from one state into another, but the creativity always happens most intensely as the change is happening. We are excited and inspired – often confused and frightened -- by being in the state of change as it happens. For artists (and scientists too), often the most important kind of limnality is the edge between reason and intuition – between noumenon and phenomenon. Creativity requires us to explore our limits. We discover through direct insight what exists just beyond ourselves and enter a state of ‘not knowing’ – the void. When consciousness returns to the known, new perspectives and expanded point of view have been added. By penetrating the void and returning to the phenomenal world, we define the creative act. Exploring the void, is really about learning to welcome, rather than avoid, chaos and understanding they are essential parts of the learning process.

We sometimes teach Transformative Arts as an alternative to Art-Therapy. Graduates from our program sometimes do work in the community that at first appears to be like art therapy. If ‘art therapy’ is defined as art that helps others – transformative arts can certainly be art therapy. The more frequent use of 'art therapy', however, refers to the practice of psychotherapy aided by techniques associated with creative self-expression – free-associative drawings and paintings, expressive movement and poetry as well as other techniques aimed at allowing the ‘clients’ to free themselves from emotional blocks by expressing inner reality. The audience in such practice is inevitably the therapist. A connection is made in art therapy, but it is a contrived and limited connection when compared to the open and spontaneous connections that occur in self-expressive creative work which enters the world as 'art' – even student or amateur art. The transformative potential of art is directly related to the number of people to whom artists connect through their artwork. It is also related to the ‘receptivity’ of those people to the artwork being presented to them. It is important for artists to understand that they create art for others as well as creating it for themselves. In the act of aesthetic reception the ‘I-thou’ boundary is blurred. Transformative Art acknowledges a paradox – a single gestalt of artist and viewer when true artistic connection occurs. It might seem like a casually positive response to an artwork, or a profound revelation. In both cases, the moment of recognition of truth in the artwork creates an event in which linear notions of identity, time and space are suspended. This is the nature of aesthetic response.

Artists throughout history and across cultures have understood the transformative power of their work. In contemporary art, there is a competing ethos of political posture – opposing cultural oppression and globalization, with an overall acknowledgement of futility and a corresponding embrace of frivolity. Both motives are part of ‘the canon’. However, the notion that art actually changes things on a spiritual (and therefore a material) level eludes the grasp of most contemporary art theorists. Instead they argue for a flat-footed use of art as a kind of propaganda – advertising against a philosophically and morally bankrupt world culture. By failing to acknowledge the fundamental nature of creative expression, they limit the possibilities of art. Transformative Art stands for limitless possibilities. The seminal post-modern philosopher, Jacques Derrida, said that language is an intrinsically unreliable structure for communication -- taken by most of his followers to be a proclamation of the end of culture and meaning, since they believe those things are derived from language. But Derrida recognized a larger truth – seldom acknowledged by his acolytes -- that real meaning exists in a dimension that transcends reason and language. He called it ‘a dimension of not-knowing’ and suggested that this was the appropriate domain for true education. Creativity and transformation require entering that dimension – going beyond language and reason and finding the common ground between all living things from which real creativity and profound transformation emerge. Rilke said, ‘The only journey is the journey within.’ That’s the true foundation of transformative art.

Art and Consciousness in China -- Cultural Evolution

Conditions and Strategies: Contemporary Art Education and Communication Symposium; China Academy of Art – Hangzhou China, April 2008

I recently participated in a fascinating conference on the nature of art schools and education in Europe and Asia sponsored by the most prestigious Art College in China that included art school leaders from elite art schools all over Europe and Asia as well as four from the US. Conspicuous by their absence were any art schools from the third world – none from South America, Africa or the Middle East. Oddly absent too, were representatives from prestigious Australian and New Zealand Art colleges. This visit to China was all about cultural change and institutional prestige.

We had all been invited to a attend this conference celebrating the 80th Anniversary of the China Academy of Art, with 7,000 students China’s second largest, and by far its most prestigious, art college. Over a hundred distinguished art educators from around the world, and I, were housed and fed in luxury for three days in China’s most beautiful city – Hangzhou. We stayed in an elegant hotel, once the domain of high party officials. Facing Hangzhou’s renowned West Lake our hotel was surrounded with fruit trees in full blossom and the unmistakable scent of Chinese Springtime. In China, last week, everything was blossoming.

The stated intention of the conference was to celebrate the anniversary of the China Academy through a meaningful dialogue of contemporary ideas about art colleges and the nature of inter-cultural communication. The subtler agenda was recognition of CAA as a world-class arts institution by the schools whose opinions and relationships China values most – the elite art schools of the world. CAA had just completed a gigantic new campus which featured a 14 story glass tower, as well as about a dozen other buildings, with commanding views of the Hangzhou countryside, where our conference mostly took place. We were there to be impressed by the sheer spectacle of Chinese wealth and ambition. It had been 16 years since I first visited this art school and I was impressed by one thing at least. China has really changed!

We saw clear signs that Chinese art students were actually being encouraged to think independently, to make politically sensitive art works and to challenge repression. First year students were being encouraged to express individual ideas and to experiment with surrealist explorations of the unconscious through drawing and painting exercises. In the past they were only encouraged to develop hand skills and to recite the tired old 19th century artistic styles that were associated with Mao and Stalin and to disdain the traditional artistic practices of Chinese Art. Today, even industrial design students are being taught the traditional Chinese practices of ink and brush -- calligraphy and landscape painting. China is clearly exploring bold new ideas in art education that are somehow deeply related to the astonishing signs of economic wealth that are everywhere today in China. Where only a few years ago there were modest family-run sidewalk grocery stores, there are now posh new Maserati dealerships -- right next door to the art school. Where once students faced bleak careers as official propaganda artists and designers of dull utilitarian appliances, there is now anticipation of wealth and excitement. Students today talk of multi-media installations and video art. They speak openly of political change in China. Young Chinese art students are frank in expressing their belief that this is their century.

I felt deeply honored to have been among those invited, but a bit out of place among such august institutions as the University of the Arts in Berlin and Rhode Island School of Design, and the Tokyo University of the Arts, to name a few. In my introductory address to those assembled, I acknowledged that my program – Arts and Consciousness at JFK University, with only about 70 students, was by far the smallest school present. ‘We’re small’, I told the group ‘but we have big ideas, and big ideas are what changes things – not big buildings’. I told them I thought we were all there to honor and recognize the China Academy’s achievements and to change the world. I received polite applause and a few gratuitous handshakes afterwards. I had seen profound changes in China upon my arrival in China and was eager to be a part of them.

The next two days consisted of tours of the impressive new campus – the newest and largest of three CAA campuses is over 80 acres and includes massive structures for virtually every form of art and design – architecture, Chinese traditional art and most interesting to me, Experimental Art – a daring new BFA and MFA program that invites political and social commentary as well as the use of new genres such as installation, performance art and social and personal documentary and multi-media. They were clearly proud of their new showpiece buildings and technical facilities which included state of the art digital labs and film and video production studios. One student's artwork was openly critical of Chinese government policy towards Tibet. I commented about the blatant dissidence of the student's artwork to an older faculty member. Wouldn't this student have been in serious trouble for this kind of work a few years ago?, I asked. China has changed, she told me solemnly, suggesting that she was not entirely pleased with the new openness, and that she basically considered the student a criminal for criticizing the government -- but rather expressing this belief, she simply stared at the work and moved on.

The President of the China Academy is a tall attractive man in his early 50’s, usually dressed in a hip designer leather jacket and blue jeans. Xiu Jiang did graduate work in Germany in the 80’s. He was formerly the chair of the China Academy’s oil painting department and is purportedly the favorite nephew of China’s former President Jiang Zemin. I have known Xiu Jiang for more than a decade and it is our personal relationship, and mutual friends, that got me invited to participate in this gathering of elites rather than an acknowledgement of JFKU’s preeminence in the art world. President Xiu is clearly set on the path of opening China to the rest of the world – no longer a matter of East and West. China is participating fully in – maybe even engineering – a new kind of cultural scene that is non-local and non-partisan. Xiu Jiang’s political connections to the Chinese government and his radical ideas about artistic freedom signify an important addition to the world as a whole. China has changed – is changing – and doing it in a way that has already subtly eroded the foundations of Western civilization – of Asian civilization – of Communism and Capitalism – of everything. Xiu Jiang aims to create a new perspective on world civilization – not dominated by any ideology (China doesn’t really have an ideology anymore anyway) or nation. China seems to be on the verge of re-discovering its own identity at the very moment that the entire idea of national or even ethnic identity is about to vaporize into irrelevance.

In his opening address President Xiu Jiang, challenged those present to open a new dialogue and exchange about art, education and ideas – perilous ground even today for a Chinese artist/educator. Five years earlier at his opening address on the re-building of the school’s main campus and to a largely Chinese audience, Xiu told everyone with great passion that everything would be different from now on – that the old ways of doing things in China were over. He said there would be new art and new educational policies that would encourage artistic expression and innovation even if the government didn’t agree with it. The looks on the faces of the uniformed Chinese officials present were astonished – dumbfounded by the boldness of Xiu Jiang’s words and fearful of this bold new direction. It was clear that they all saw him as untouchable politically and his utterances were certainly endorsed by the highest levels of the Chinese government. They were bewildered. In China one realizes that what is understood and implied is almost always more important than what is said outright – and what Xiu Jiang said outright was very important.

In the April 2008 conference, Xiu Jiang still spoke with passion and power – still spoke apparently with the imprimatur of the Chinese party leaders. His voice was even more passionate now, but instead of challenging the old ways, he spoke of hope and the future of friendship and ‘guanxi’ – that most important of Chinese words meaning ‘relationship’. He powerfully acknowledged the rapidly expanding partnerships between Chinese art colleges and industry. Xiu Jiang invited all the foreigners and Chinese educators alike, to create something new – to change the world as I myself had modestly and ineffectively exhorted them to do the night before.

In the ensuing two days a seemingly endless stream of 15-20 minute presentations by art school presidents from around the world occurred. Most were simply attempts at institutional promotion listing the great accomplishments of their particular art schools or their perspectives on the nature of art education as national identity and craft. Most of the speakers had nothing new to say and seemed oblivious to the profound changes that were occurring all around them. The best of the presentations, to my mind, dealt with the new issues at hand. What does it mean to make art about a world in which East and West merge into each other? What is the relationship between art, power and cultural identity. What role does the Internet play in re-shaping cultural identity and the foundations of art education? Some art school leaders talked about programs in their schools that addressed the critical issues of a post-post modern and culturally pluralistic world. It was clear that even among the elites, innovation was still the hallmark of the best schools.

The President of San Francisco Art Institute, my fellow traveler Chris Bratten, talked about the ‘Global Studio’ and the imperative for art to be seen as non-local, and interested in issues of justice and social evolution. He said that the ‘best’ art schools realize that the process of art education is ‘simultaneously self-reflexive and dialogical’. He understood an important fact the others seemed to miss – that possibility of cultural exchange was significant as a process rather than as the exchange of knowledge and techniques. He spoke about issues of identity and social relevance that were the heart of what we were there to witness, but which most of us were too self-interested to really appreciate at the time.

Dean Giaco Schiesser of the Zurich University of the Arts acknowledged that the real conversation about what was happening in art and education was only just beginning - that we hadn’t really even identified the true issues at hand. He quoted at length a hugely important, though largely unknown, speech by Jacques Derrida regarding the ‘University without Condition’ (Die unbedinkte Universität). By interpreting Derrida’s ideas, he named the real issues facing us; re-examination of the function of art schools in a post-industrial society (he forgot the China is still an industrial society) and the inevitability of art and culture in issues of social, economic and political change. Schiesser was eloquent in describing the realities of post-modern Europe and America, but misunderstood that the biggest difference between China and ‘the West’ is probably China’s new industrialization . His most significant insight in interpreting Derrida was in stating Derrida’s definition of ‘professor’ as ‘one who views himself as a responsible creator of works rather than someone who merely applies and disseminates knowledge.’ Professor Schiesser understood the importance of Derrida’s remarks. Art professors must be ‘creators of works’ – responsible for the creation of new synergies and strategies for change. Schiesser says Derrida points the way toward the dimension of ‘not-knowing’ and ‘the dimension beyond linguistic knowledge…toward ‘the impossible’ which manifests itself in the events of giving, confession, invention, hospitality or (though Derrida never says so explicitly), the arts’.

Witnessing the profound changes in Chinese art education is only fully possible when one enters that state of ‘not knowing’. Comprehending cultural transformation from the inside requires an acknowledgment that art itself is a process of change and surprise. In hearing the pronouncements by the cultural gatekeepers of international arts education, I was acutely aware that this is a perfect moment of change. We’re right in the middle of it – right this second. In that conference room atop that spectacular glass art-school tower, twelve stories above the Chinese countryside, I witnessed dinosaurs and newly evolving birds, right in the same room. Some of us were dying – speaking from the extinct paradigms of privilege and self-interest; of material and political power wielded by art ‘academies’ of the past. Some of us were evolving – trying to use our new feathers, words, images and brave new ideas, to fly. The symbolism of meeting in so high a place seemed to accentuate China's awareness of its own evolution. It seemed clear that the leaders of the conference were inviting us to see the world differently -- to discover new heights. I left the conference with a great sense of not-knowing. Maybe that's the only way to really experience evolution.

Art and Abundance

This past Sunday, November 11, 2007, marked a small but significant step in the re-definition of art and its role in society. Three artists were featured at JFK University's Berkeley campus discussing their creative journeies from artist, to entrepreneur to transformer of social consciousness. Rheem Rahim, a painter and graduate of the MFA program at JFK, used her small ink painitngs and monoprints as the central market focus of her innovative, socially and environmentally sustanable and brilliantly innovative company Numi Tea. Gina Wilde (MA Transformative Arts) a musician, sculptor, dancer and performance artist and fiber artist, developed Alchemy Yarns after discovering that many commercially dyed yarns were highly toxic. In response. she developed entirely new and envoirnmentally friendly dying techniques. This led her into the development of a highly successful yarn business, which led her, in turn, to fashion design using her innovative and beautiful knitting techniques. Her success and innovative ideas have led to, a lucrative book deal with Random House Publishing and having her company and her design work profiled on the cover the 25th anniversary edition of Vogue Magazine. Michael Sturtz, a sculptor, is the founder and Executive Director of The Crucible, in Oakland California -- a revolutionary public arts institution, primarily involved with fire (welding, foundary work and related art-forms) dedicated to community service and fascilitating the development of creativity in the public. Last year over 5000 people were served in a variety of classes workshops and community events teaching a wide array of skills and offering wonderfully innovative services to the community.

The three artist-entrepreneurs explained how their direct experience of art and creativity had manifest, almost without their consciousness realization, as major community-based, multi-million dollar organizations. The speakers shared some remarkable insights into the relationship between art, creativity and abundnace:

* First and most important is focus. Be entirely clear about what you're aiming at and keep working on it until you get there. They shared a common assertion that artists have special resources - creativity, curiosity, skill and discipline - that can help them achieve great things.

* The spiritual dimension of art inevitably leads artists into greater levels of compassion and eventually into a need to find community relevance. Creative self-expression isn't enough. Artwork has a responsibility to enhance people's lives, to serve the community and offer inspiration and transformation.

* Material wealth is a by-product, rather than a central aim, of creative entrepreneurship. The combination of creativity and compassion suggests new and innoivative ways to create value and inter-connection. People are eager to exchange wealth for inspiration and transformation. It's a valuable commodity and an essential service that is rarely available.

* All of the organizations discussed at the symposium have achieved meteoric success. All three artists said it was hard work bringing their organizations into the world. The good part is that it's powerful and maningful. All three found this kind of ahard work immensely satisfying and rewarding on many levels.

* The symposium presenters agreed that there had been difficult challenges and problems that sometimes seemed insurmountable, but that they were all able through determination and creative problem-solving, to use these challenges as opportunities for new directions and innovations. Theyagreed that the problems and failures they encountered were all part of the fun and excitement of discoverin new ways to bring art and creativity to the widest possible audience.

It is clear from the success of Rheem, Gina and Michael and their graciousnerss in sharing their ground-breaking ideas about organizations, business and the creative process, that a new era of art as a community collaboration has arrived. The old paradigm of art as decoration or illustration is now being replaced with the idea that art offers all f us an important new vehicle to add meaning, excitement and a sense of spiritual connection to our lives. In the creative process art expands beyond the individual and reaches out to an eager audience if we're prepared to see beyond the personal and into the universal. In a world where 'more stuff' is increasingly problematic, the new value added lies in creativity, personal fulfillment and community interaction. It's the high ground for art and artists. The implications are epic and offer an entirely new challenge to art schools, cultural institutions and artists thrughout the world. Value, inter-connection and compassion are becoming the new hallmarks of artistic success. We're loking forward to following-up this exciting event with continuing public programs celebrating the fusion of art and abundance - creativity and the affirmation of spirit.