The following speech was written for the ceremony that opened the Traveling Vietnam Veterans Memorial on the campus of the University of Arkansas - Fort Smith on June 30, 1990.

Teaching Thinking: Artistic Form and Arts Education 

Henry Q. Rinne

In a speech to the Association of American Museums, the eminent philosopher, Nelson Goodman, related a story concerning his good friend Professor Hans Trublemacher. It seems that the respected professor had visited Mars to assess the state of science education and, in so doing, discovered the rather peculiar state of Martian libraries. These institutions contained no tables, very few chairs (mostly for the guards), no open shelves, and the only books were placed on pedestals in the center of the rooms or behind rails along the walls. The latter were hooked up to devices that turned pages automatically, allowing the Martians to read the material without actually coming in contact with the books. Miniature tape players were also available to the users, which had the novel addition of projecting text above each of the works on display. The professor infers that the function of these devices has something to do with controlling the pace of the reader. Specially trained volunteers lead groups of children through the library, stopping occasionally to describe in very hushed tones certain books of interest to "young readers." 

Finally, the professor discovered a small shop at the entrance of the library which sold miniature reproductions of the books on display. The copies were, unfortunately, too small to be of any practical use to anyone.  Obviously, Goodman is projecting the archetype of a modern art museum onto the format of a library to emphasize the inaccessibility of works of art to the general public. Libraries are not run like museums, and museums could not offer a circulating collection common to most public libraries. The intended meaning of his apocryphal tale illustrates the fact that while most users of a public library can read (or, in recent years, merely view videotapes), very few museum visitors can "see." Education cannot be exclusively verbal in either its ends or its means; for it consists not merely of adding to knowledge--to true beliefs--but of the overall advancement of understanding (Goodman 173). 

Understanding is the goal of education—understanding which comes from learning to deal with abstract ideas in both a critical and creative context. Learning to learn, and may I add, learning to learn in as many different ways as possible, should be a primary goal of education as we enter the last decade of the twentieth century. Literacy in the arts must be part of the foundation of this diverse approach to developing students' abilities to think, reason, and, above all, understand ideas. The arts provide a significant, dare I say essential, means of achieving this understanding. The arts are not entertainment for the sole purpose of occupying leisure time. Artistic expression is a fundamental way in which human beings communicate and discover knowledge of who we are and what it means to be alive in this world. 

One of the principal reasons for the misunderstandings and misconceptions concerning art and its role in our culture arises from a fundamental lack of arts education at all levels of our public schools and colleges. Art contributes to our ever-expanding base of knowledge in equal measure to the sciences but communicates its discoveries in a decidedly different manner. Art is about ideas--social ideas, political ideas, religious ideas, even ideas concerning the complex emotional life that exists inside every human. In amongst the fiery controversy surrounding the federal funding of artistic works, the ideas expressed by the artists seem to be ignored. No one wants to deal with what it is the artists are saying in their works, but satisfy themselves only with criticism of a superficial nature. By addressing only the subject matter of a work of art, the viewer risks the possibility of not discovering the idea expressed by the artist and may denounce a work as obscene or vulgar. 

Art cannot be indecent or pornographic! Art may share the same subject matter as pornography but remains an altogether separate entity. This distinction is central to the confusion that arises from the condemnation of works such as the Mapplethorpe and Serrano photographs. (I always wonder if these had not been photographs but paintings or sculptures, would the same objections have been raised?) What distinguishes these works as art is the presence of "artistic form." The form of the works conveys the ideas of the artists and transcends the subject matter. Noted philosopher and aesthetician Susanne K. Langer stated that artistic "form is the symbolism that conveys the idea of vital reality; and the emotive import belongs to the form itself, not to anything it represents or suggests." Art is the expression of an idea through artistic form; pornography, on the other hand, attempts to evoke a singular emotional response. 

This ignorance towards artistic form provides ample room for confusion as to a definition of art. Many people seem to link the definition to the choice of subject matter when the presence of artistic form should be the principal criteria for identifying works of art. Pornography is also not difficult to define. Operators and patrons of adult bookstores have no trouble identifying it. But you will not find works of art on display or for sale in these establishments nor will you find pornography in museums and galleries. Works of art, no matter what the subject matter, do not serve the erotic function so desired by those who purchase "dirty" books, films, and magazines. A nude by Renoir, Manet, or any other artist is distinguished from the Playboy or Penthouse centerfold because of the absence of formal structures in the latter. Pornography does not depend on artistic form--it does not need to in order to accomplish its desired end. 

Artistic form communicates to the audience, and its presence is undeniable even if its presence is not immediately clear. The Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington, DC, has become a powerful, healing force to many in this country who were affected by the Vietnam War. The project, which resulted in the construction of the "wall" bearing the names of those killed in the war, was not without controversy itself. Designed by a 19-year-old student at Yale, the wall received heated criticism from veterans groups, the media, and the general public. It was hard to conceive of a subterranean double-wedge of polished black granite forming an obtuse angle as any kind of memorial to those who gave their lives in service to the country. The design certainly bore no resemblance to the Iwo Jima memorial across the river in Virginia, but then the Vietnam War did not resemble World War II. 

Despite the controversial nature of the project, construction was completed and the wall was dedicated in 1984. Since then, the impact of the structure and its contribution to healing the wounds, both personal and national, have been well documented. The wall has allowed us to grieve for these men and women and to grieve for ourselves. When you move down the walkway in front of the memorial, the expanding height of the wall with the corresponding growth of names begins to overwhelm the visitor. Our image is reflected in the polished surface, and we are consumed by the wall's magnitude and monumentality. Listening to the other visitors and the veterans who form an unofficial honor guard for the memorial, one is impressed by the sanctity of the place. You stand on sacred ground in the presence of the dead. 

A short distance away is Thomas Hart's statue of three soldiers of the Vietnam era dressed in combat fatigues. In front of this representational work, the mood is quite different from that in front of the wall. Here, the people talk of the uniforms the figures are wearing or the weapons carried in their hands. A friendly argument ensues between two veterans as to the authenticity and detail of the work--how "real" it is or isn't. As a work of art, the representational figures in this piece fail to express much of anything, either emotional or ideational. In its presence, the visitor observes an illustration of three Americans in the battle dress of a particular period in our history. Whatever the viewer knows of this event or era is not communicated through the work but must be found elsewhere. The best it can do is stimulate a discussion concerning its degree of realism. 

What the wall does is make us cry, make us feel, make us mourn for those inscribed on it and for the nation. The force that accomplishes this communication is artistic form. It is this component that conveys this emotional intensity and initiates the process of healing. 

The effect of form in works of art can not always be felt with the immediate impact found in the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. Often, the subtlety of the artist's constructions or the remoteness of the ideas from our experience make it difficult to comprehend the content of some works. However, these works are still worthy of attention; it simply necessitates educating ourselves to this very special way of communicating ideas. Funding of arts projects by the government contributes to this process of understanding the value of art in our culture. By providing monies for educational improvement, we increase potential understanding of works of art and develop abilities to deal with abstract concepts and ideas. Creative artists are engaged in a type of research that is every bit as valuable as research conducted in the sciences. People in both areas are concerned with aspects of what it means to be human, and both are worthy of financial support from the taxpayers. As in the scientific disciplines, the National Endowment for the Arts has a rigid system of advisory boards consisting of artists and other responsible individuals. These boards oversee the disbursement of taxpayers' dollars in the same way funds are allocated to researchers in the sciences. The laws and regulations are adequate to ensure the proper funding, but the public and Congress (Senator Helms in particular) must understand the criteria involved. A stronger emphasis on education in all of the arts and, in this case, visual literacy would help to eliminate the misunderstandings that are at the heart of this problem. 

Works Cited 

Goodman, Nelson. Of Mind and Other Matters. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1984. 

Langer, Susanne K. Feeling and Form: A Theory of Art.  New York:  Charles Scribner and Sons, 1953.