Art as a Subject for the Elite

Art as a Subject for the Elite

For centuries the subject of art history has been preserved mainly for the elite and aristocrats. This is because its abstract language suited and pleased the particular tastes of the upper-class and received its exclusive approval from the elite class and its institutions (Starkey, 2013). For centuries, the validity of art creations has been determined by critics, academics, art administrators, dealers, and curators, all of whom belong to the wealthy and elite class. (Pell, 2016). But while the art industry has become a multi-million industry, admitting people of all ages and social backgrounds, things have not changed much.  The exclusivity of the subject and its lack of applicability, especially in a graduate-skill driven world, have once again made arts a preserve of the elite (Starkey, 2013). In England, the government revised the high school curriculum in 2015, removing most of the art subjects in favor of English, Maths, Sciences, modern languages, geography, and history, which are regarded ‘core academic subjects’ (Annetts, 2018). However, art history decline in public education is global. Only 10 percent of state schools globally offered art history as compared to 90 percent of private schools (Pell, 2016).   Even in university, art history is considered a high-class subject, judging by the number of aristocrats who have studied it, including Princess Beatrice, Prince William, and Duchess Kate Middleton, due to its narrow industrial application (Starkey, 2013). Thus, art is preserved as a subject of the elite because many people do not understand its language; it has a narrow industrial application and its dependence to the elite validation.

Art as a subject for the elite does not simply mean that artists do belong to the elite group or enjoy the privileges of the elite. The assumption is, however, brought about by the fact that art has been suited to please or fit a certain group in the society, which in this case, is upper-class. I gather the exclusivity and the approval of the elite and American institutions; the elite group was defined by Annetts (2018) as those in the upper economic, political, or military circles. Pell (2016) further added that they are primarily those powerful members in the corporate, bureaucratic, and government groups, who have a large control on vital policies and institutions. With the escalation of capitalism across the world, the influence of the western military, and a global market economy, there has been an equal escalation of class on a global scale. The term global economy has largely been influenced by the escalation in these class divisions and the competition that often results from the sharing of economic profits and growth.

A close scrutiny on the rise in capitalism coupled with the escalation of industrialization, which traces its roots from the western world in the 19^th century, and taking into consideration the relations between arts and the powers that have been created through the global economy, the true state of the modern art has therefore been questioned (Pell, 2016).

The industrial and urban development in the western world in the 19^th century influenced the economic, political, and social nature of the west in a significant way. It is through these changes that modernism was borne. The movement of modernism was spurred by modernists who crafted the current market advancements and thereby fostering the ideas and opinions of the modern world.  Modernist art is said to have located from two locations of the western world, which include Paris, which was the first location in the 19^th and 20^th century and New York in the mid 20^th century. Some of the earliest advocates of modernist art include the impressionist and Édouard Manet in Paris and the expressionists from the western world (Pell, 2016).

Reflecting on aesthetic history above gives on how art has evolved from a subject for all to a subject that is reserved for the elite. Art in the past was reserved as a subject for the educated and the wealthy, and the trend has not even changed in recent years, where galleries have become an exclusive reserve for the middle-class. Galleries have been termed as terrifying since the cryptic language is only reserved for a few people. There are many who are of the opinion that art is a baffling subject.

Students and the public have, over the years, had the perception that art is for wealthy private schools. The image of art as an elite subject has been orchestrated by the number of royals who have studied it with names such as Princess Beatrice, Prince William and Duchess Kate Middleton topping the list. The above notion has, therefore, created the assumption that it is only those from a wealthy background who can study it. In addition, it has also given the impression that the subject is not useful in the current landscape of learning. In graduate schools, the subject has also been a reserve for a few students. In Cambridge University, for instance, over 70 percent of the available places in the school of art is reserved for the independent schools, while only 30% is reserved for students from state schools (Starkey, 2013). The above has thereby exacerbated the notion even at the university level; art is exclusively for the wealthy population. Those who study art at the university level are most likely those who visited art galleries at a young age and studied art at the A-level, a factor synonymous with wealthy families.

More recently, countries such as England eliminated art as a subject from all A-level schools and thereby exacerbating the situation that art is only a reserve for the rich. With the elimination of art from the A-levels, it is now clear that art will only be available in a few selected schools that are owned by the elite and will only be affordable to a selected few. The fact that the ministry of education insinuated that it was very expensive to maintain the subject implies that the costs associated with the running of the subject can only be funded by the elite group. The above point implies that no pupil who is not from an elite family will access or afford to undertake an art subject in the near future.

While the above point is true, art should not remain as a subject that is reserved exclusively for the elite. The above is influenced by the fact that despite art being perceived as a preserve for the elite, it has historically been one of the most lucid ways of perceiving history and thereby providing a better lens of the world around us. Art is available to all regardless of their status. In spite of the high costs that are associated with visiting galleries, all forms of artwork are available in major art workshops across the world through books, journals, and online publications, which are not exclusively for the elite. These sources of art are available to all persons regardless of their social status and continue to be available regardless of whether the subject is in the curriculum or not. Art traces its sociological changes throughout history from the lenses of real people, and studying it is one of the most profound ways of improving our interpretive and analytical abilities. While art may not provide a doorstep to the conventional graduate jobs, its importance in the world cannot be judged through a curriculum and stereotypes that have come up over the years (Pell, 2016).

In conclusion, it is palpable that art has been a preserve for the elite not only in recent years but from the 19^th century, when modern art emerged in Paris, France. The notion has largely been orchestrated by the fact that it has historically been available in a few private luxurious schools.  Also, the elite has a large influence or validation on its availability, as evidenced by the recent elimination of the subject in England’s curriculum. In addition, it is also clear that the subject has been ignored in state schools, which are affordable to many, and universities also have a high percentage of reserved slots for private schools. The findings above cannot, however, negate the fact that art is still a pivotal subject that is accessible to all in different sources of research such as books, journals, and internet sources, and the assumption that it is a subject for the elite should, therefore, be eliminated.

References

Annetts, D. (18 April, 2018). Arts Risk Becoming the Preserve of the Elite Once Again. The Telegraph. Retrieved 23 Feb, 2020 from, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2018/04/18/arts-risk-becoming-preserve-elite/

Pell, R. ( 13 Oct, 2016). Cutting Creative A-Levels Allows Arts Industry to be ‘Dominated by the Wealthy elite’. The Independent. Retrieved 23 Feb, 2020 from, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/cutting-art-history-dr-janina-ramirez-a-levels-allows-arts-industry-to-be-dominated-wealthy-elite-a7360346.html

Starkey, J. ( 9 Jan, 2013).  History of Arts: A degree for the elite? The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/education/2013/jan/09/history-of-art-a-degree-for-the-elite