Teaching as an Art Form

After an event that I directed, I had an interesting conversation with Judah Paolo, and Josh and Danielle, two radio DJ's, in the backstage.  While the staff, the artists, and guests were congratulating each other for the success of the event, I joined the three of them in their post-event snack to tell them what a great job they had done and that I looked forward to working with them again.  During our short banter, I told them that I was a teacher and that I enjoyed doing it.  I told them that I had never felt so fulfilled.  I added that for me, my experience in the corporate world before was nothing compared to teaching.  Judah asked me what the truth in my life was and I told him it was teaching.  He then asked me, "Is teaching a form of art?".  I answered both seriously and jokingly, "Well.  Yes, teaching is a form of art.  If art explores humanities, then art explores humans.  As a teacher, we get to explore students who are humans.  So yes, teaching is a form of art."   He also told me that there are two most fulfilling professions, being a priest and teaching.  I agreed.  No one can put a price on teaching.  Teaching is priceless.  It has rewards that are beyond measurable, beyond space, beyond time.

Days after our conversation, my mind explored the idea of art in relation to teaching - teaching as an art form.  I couldn't seem to get it off of my head.  I googled "teaching as an art form" and there were 40, 600 hits.  I read some of them and some of them were enlightening, some were flat out experience-based and so I said to myself that I would make another one slanting towards the basic definition of art and its scope in teaching.  I wish to share this to everyone most especially to my fellow teachers.  What seems to be a simple answer actually turns out to be a rather deep and fulfilling journey for the reconciliation of these two ideologies.

Art is most often understood to refer to painting, film, photography, sculpture, and other visual media.  Music, theatre, dance, literature, and interactive media are included in a broader definition of art or the arts.  Until the 17th century, art referred to any skill or mastery and was not differentiated from crafts or sciences, but in modern usage, the fine arts are distinguished from acquired skills in general. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art)

Naturally, art is a product of someone who is skilled in fine arts.  Thus, we call painting, film, photography, sculpture and other visual media arts.  Include to this, music, dance, literature, and interactive media that comprise the broader definition of art.  These genres of art must (of course) be created or produced by artists (or so they are called) so we may regard them as a fine form of art.

Many definitions of art have been proposed by philosophers and others who have characterized art in terms of mimesis, expression, communication of emotion, or other values.  (Ibid.)  Philosophers in the earlier times characterized art simply as a form of fine and rather polished expression and the skillful and the creative artists that we are should serve as the conduit of that expression.  But once again, we can't merely express.  We should be (I repeat) skillful and creative.  This skillfulness or creativity should lead to the related concept of philosophy known as aesthetics.

On the other hand, the humanities include ancient and modern languages, literature, history, philosophy, religion, and visual and performing arts such as music and theatre.  The humanities that are also regarded as social sciences include technology, history, anthropology, area studies, communication studies, cultural studies, law and linguistics. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanities.)  

Before we actually get overwhelmed with the wordplay Wikipedia quotes for us, let's just deduce that humanities actually encompass a broader scope than art does.  So, I stand corrected.  Humanities studies the arts.  And arts contribute information for the deeper understanding of humanities.  

What then does this premise have to do with teaching as a profession?

Teaching, as a vocation, has been defined by many as a calling, and most importantly (for me) - life's purpose, and a mission.  Just recently, I heard someone commented, "I don't believe that teaching is a calling.  I think people teach because of course they also want money."  I wanted to respond to it but since it wasn't being addressed to me, I withheld my thought.  I must say, however, that it bothered me as a teacher.  It bothered me because in a way, I felt that teachers who think that way could give this profession a bad name; this profession that so many teachers at heart take pride of even at their old age; this profession that so many teachers cherish that even if they are being asked to retire they still stay in the profession for the love of it - for the love of shaping young minds who will eventually become the carrier of the torch of the new generation.

(To be continued.)