The Phelan firing has brought to the fore some of the primary issues of contemporary art in an academic setting. For one thing: Does it belong there? At Harvard at least the short term answer seems to be, not really. Or not that way. Or at least not Phelan’s way. Even though everyone close to the issue would readily say that she brought Harvard into the forefront of thinking about and actually creating contemporary art.

The Fogg, arguably one of the world’s greatest museum collections and teaching institutions, has trained generations of art historians, curators and museum directors....

Actually getting paint on your hands and jeans, however, that’s quite another matter. It’s ok as a kind of dilettante activity, part of being a well rounded individual and all that. But not, for heavens sake, as a serious ambition and even profession. Harvard is not in the business, not now, perhaps not never, of producing actual artists.

Phelan tried. Boy did she try. And she got a lot of her friends, and those of her husband, sculptor, Joel Shapiro, to come to Cambridge and stir the sauce. The faculty and adjuncts were stunning....

 ... The buzz was that she included her friends. OK, but doesn’t everybody. And, what friends.

But Harvard found Phelan and her crew a bit unruly. Even from brilliant artists that isn’t quite done. After all we are talking about Harvard and all that....

Yale, however, has its famous school of fine arts. For decades it has been a leader in the field drawing distinguished faculty and producing generations of leading artists. So, what’s the problem?

Can a great university maintain the highest academic and intellectual standards and still train and attract artists? On this point Tomkins quotes Harold Rosenberg.

"Can there be any doubt that training in the university has contributed to the cool, impersonal wave in the art of the sixties," he observed in 1960. Tomkins states, "In order to become an academic discipline, art had to be intellectualized. Craft and technique were subordinated to verbal analysis, problem solving and critical theory. University art teaching, in fact, became more and more like academic research, with the pursuit of ideas as its primary goal."

During the Renaissance artists learned their craft as apprentices to masters. You started by sweeping the studio and gradually progressed to working on murals and monumental sculpture before leaving to pursue your own career. During the era of Napoleon L’Ecole des beaux arts, the Academy, was founded to train artists and architects to serve the needs of the state. This was the tradition that persisted until the modern era and the all important BFA and MFA programs. Even a generation ago, artists graduated from certificate programs fully trained in the craft and studio traditions. Now they, "major" in studio and "minor" in philosophy and theory. This seems to be the norm and sells better to parents and students undertaking an art education as it implies some security. With a BFA, the logic goes, one can then go on to get an, MFA. That in turn will get you a tenure track teaching position and you will live happily every after teaching introduction to graphic design in Nebraska. God willing.

Question is: What does that have to do with being an artist? And, what happened to the craft of art when we got inundated with the theory of art....

Prior to bringing Phelan to Harvard in what is now perhaps a radical and brilliant but failed experiment, the university, internally agonized long and hard. Perhaps it was just not the right fit. In moving ahead brilliantly and aggressively she failed to respect the ancient and venerable protocols. For this she has my respect and admiration....

Perhaps she should not have stated in a meeting, as quoted by Tomkins, ‘Those cocksuckers in University Hall.’ Perhaps there is a ring of truth to that. But it is just not quite what a department chair says at a department meeting at Harvard. But it is what an artist would say. And sometimes that presents tough decisions for artists. Are they going to remain true to their identities as artists or play the academic game? Phelan has been replaced by an insider from the English department. And not on a temporary basis. Sounds like the Carpenter Center for the Visual Arts is under house arrest.

The Harvard case study has potential to resonate on campuses great and small. It does raise the issue of the role, presence, behavior and restraints on the creative artists in an academic environment....

While Harvard is wrestling with this issue, other colleges and universities have long-established and progressive programs....

So, yes, it can be done. Just how and under what circumstances is the subject for further study and debate. But there is one clear message in all this turmoil. Don’t call the dean a cocksucker. Tsk, tsk.

Copyright © 2002, Charles Giuliano

Charles Giuliano is a Boston based artist, curator and critic.