Thinking About Disciplinary Literacies Through the Artwork of Kerry James Marshall
Now if I want to be competitive without reinforcing the dominance of the artists who were doing their own thing then I have to figure out how to project the image that I want to see represented in the world
with the same kind of force, with the same kind of complexity, with the same kind of integrity.
-Kerry James Marshall
I have always considered myself to be a reader, but these articles pushed me to question the depth of that identity. Truth-be-told, there are numerous topics that leave me feeling incoherent and dumb. Ask me to share an opinion about wine, sports, or art and I lack even a basic vocabulary or means of decoding the glass/game/painting in front of me; I can talk about books for hours, but, “It’s nice” or “I don’t get it” are sometimes all the words I have.
As I delved into the readings this week, I remembered the first (and maybe only) time I got lost in a painting. It was the Kerry James Marshall "Mastry" exhibition at the Met in 2017. I remember the feeling of, for the first time, being able to see beyond the color and paint strokes, and of being aware of a much more significant meaning. I couldn’t quite grasp it, but I could feel the pull of the image and something profound about its placement in that gallery. When I sat down to write my reflections, I went back to Marshall’s work and reviewed the video message he recorded for the exhibit. I can’t help but see so many connections between our readings and his artistic praxis.
Marshall is a Black American artist who is celebrated for his deliberate and uncompromising portrayal of Black life that challenges the Western artistic canon. He is remarkable, not merely for his technical proficiency, but also for the ways that he both mastered and subverted the discipline to challenge the historical lack of Black representation. As Marshall says, "I wanted to figure out how to close the gap between what I was doing and what they had done. And I felt the only way I could really do that was to know what they knew."
This emphasis on technical excellence enabled Marshall to operate within the systematized realm of formal art education. However, my understanding is that what sets Marshall apart is his strategic use of this mastery to expand upon and subvert the traditional discipline of art. Rather than conforming solely to established norms, he leveraged his deep understanding of artistic techniques to insert Black representation into a narrative that historically lacked it. Marshall's disciplined literacy in art not only empowered him to play at the highest level within the established discipline but also positioned him as a transformative force, challenging and reshaping the discipline itself. That is what I felt that day in 2017: The profound sense of Blackness and loud protest of his work in a literally all-white/White room.
What stands out to me is that Marshall's journey underscores the necessity of cultivating not only technical skills but also a critical understanding of historical narratives. His ability to subvert disciplinary literacies serves as an example for how well-trained students can challenge and reshape established norms, empowering them to be agents of change in their chosen disciplines and beyond.
I wonder what disciplines you feel strongest in (perhaps referring to Buehl’s “Towers of Literacy”)? In the disciplines that you struggle with, are there historical narratives around that topic that act as a barrier to you? In what ways do you see historical narratives in your chosen discipline as a possible barrier for your future students? To what level is “mastery” necessary if the goal is to subvert or disrupt a discipline?: What truth is there in Audre Lorde’s quote that “The master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house.”
Thanks for invoking Kerry James Marshall in this conversation about disciplinary literacy. As you note, his body of work demonstrated that it is possible to fully know how a discipline works - who is a member, what defines the boundaries, how those boundaries have been maintained and by whom - and to use that knowledge to challenge and ultimately transform the discipline. This is also a lifetime of work, a commitment to “mastery” and to disrupting the status quo that evolved over time.
ReplyDeleteTeaching within disciplines necessitates, I believe, letting students know that many of the ideas that are being shared as “truth” have been - and sometimes still are being - contested, and that things are likely to change, possibly in their lifetime. Invite them to ask questions about the discipline itself, and encourage them to see themselves as active agents and potential changemakers who can eventually become the experts that others look to.
I don’t think educators talk enough about how things change in disciplines. They - we - present disciplines as these natural, static, unyielding and permanent structures that exist beyond our presence or desires. But nearly everything that we are teaching about has an element of contestation, disagreement and compromise (even the very thing we are talking about this week - disciplinary literacy). We learn - feel compelled? - to tell a singular story about the discipline, one that elides those moments of uncertainty into a unified homogenous narrative. Until big moments of disruption - Kerry James Marshall’s work is an example of such - most teachers tend to go right along with the canon.
Your comment is also a reminder that content matters in the course of developing that disciplinary literacy. What exactly are we asking students to be literate in? We know that policymakers, scholars and educators define the scope of knowledge to be shared with students through school curricula. So becoming literate in a discipline does not necessarily mean that certain kinds of content are ever presented to the students for them to use to develop their reading and thinking skills. This reminds me of the 1619 Project and the questions it has raised about how American history is taught in schools. It also reminds me of how I was taught Sociology. I had instructors who chose to present the history of the discipline by beginning with the people often missing from the typical narratives of how the discipline came to be.
Young people learning painting over the last 10 years are being exposed to the work of Kerry James Marshall and several other artists who are painting Black people in a way that had not been done before. The students’ sense of what is true and possible in painting is made different through the literacy strategies of art educators who introduce those artists in the classroom. In the foreseeable future, literacy in U.S. art will include, knowledge and awareness of Kerry James Marshall’s techniques and vision. The students can build on that and, with practice, time and commitment, imagine and even help paint new directions.
Hi Page,
ReplyDeleteThanks for this incredibly thought-provoking post. I am really struck by your last two statements/ questions: “To what level is ‘mastery’ necessary if the goal is to subvert or disrupt a discipline?: What truth is there in Audre Lorde’s quote that ‘The master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house.’” Last semester I compiled my first syllabus: a 36-week plan to teach American history to 10th graders in CPS. We were required to include a philosophy of teaching, and in it I wrote about how neither mastery nor perfection were goals in my classroom. I stand by this, and your post, and our work in disciplinary literacies gives me more food for thought on the notion of mastery in schooling. When I was a young person, I was an avid reader of poetry. I poured over my mom and dad’s old books from college and found ee cummings, who quickly became my favorite. As you probably know, cumming’s made his name bucking conventions in American English. From his uncapitalized name, to his deployment of words for their phonetic quality rather than their given definition, and to his organization of words on a page, cummings certainly eschews modern conventions in the written English language. I remember asking my parents why poets can do that while I have to write in complete sentences, and my mother told me you have to master the English language before you can mess with it. I don’t remember being especially thrown off by this charge— and I didn’t let it stop me from writing my own unconventional poetry before completing high school—but I do remember thinking, huh, when does that happen? When do I get to declare that I am a master of something? Do I have to wait until that moment of mastery to begin questioning boundaries, frameworks, and conventions? As I reflect on that moment now, I recognize how problematic this notion of mastery before manipulation (my phrase) could be to a young person. If I had taken my mom’s words to heart, I may have never written poetry again. And now, as a less-young-person, I reflect on what cummings was really trying to do with his work: he was encouraging his readers to question the conventions of language, to giggle at its strictures and rules, and to consider a mode of thinking, communicating, and expressing that went beyond traditional modes of conveying meaning and feeling! I’m not sure if cummings would have felt that the master’s tools could dismantle the master’s house, but they sure could reveal it for what it was, or wasn’t. For me, just because a middle schooler or high schooler hasn’t achieved mastery in a discipline yet doesn’t mean that young person shouldn’t begin to question certain parts of it. When I look at the world today, the last thing I want to do is encourage young people to stop posing new questions to old problems until a later date. In fact, I think part of the fun of learning about disciplinary knowledge is asking where its potential blind spots might be. Perhaps if a student is generating these questions, then they have obtained a mastery of sorts, even if they haven’t embodied the identity of that discipline yet.
Lucy - I think that "mastery" is contextual and shows up in different ways. If you had college-level books in your house to read and were engaging with ee cummings's body of work before it was taught to you in school, that means that you had already "mastered" whatever language skills you were supposed to be developing for your age. From that perspective, you were already prepared to ask the questions. So, yes, students can demonstrate mastery even if they don't always realize what they have done. We just have to learn to see it and call it by its name.
ReplyDeleteIt also occurs to me that a conversation with youth about mastery is also a conversation about the expectations that we set for them, and how/whether we work with them to arrive at a place where they can articulate their own questions, tentatively or confidently. Part of the journey to disciplinary literacy, I think, involves building the confidence to ask questions about the discipline's approach, to name what you see as its blindspots, being skeptical of the truth claims that are made to justify the discipline, and wondering aloud whether there are other/better/more generative ways to approach an issue. As teachers, we can model that way of being for our students e.g. how we introduce material, the kinds of assignments we give, how we encourage students to dig deeper and peek over the walls to see what else is there.
Hello Page!
ReplyDeleteI really appreciate that you included art within your blog post, more specifically, the beautiful art of Kerry James Marshall. His work truly is enticing, and it makes complete sense as to how this painting was one of very few that have ever moved you. Fun fact, incase you didn’t know, Kerry James Marshall actually taught at UIC! (so cool)
In regards to your final paragraph, I found your questions surrounding mastery to be of great intrigue. You mention “To what level is “mastery” necessary if the goal is to subvert or disrupt a discipline?” & “The master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house.” Similar to Lucy, these two phrases allowed me to really ponder the subject. I feel as if mastery in relation to a discipline, especially within the art world, has the opportunity to be completely elitist and based upon arbitrary standards of what “mastery” should be. The art world in general upholds this sort of elitist and hierarchical way of thinking. So really, why should we care about mastery anyways?
This idea of “mastery” puzzles me, because as Lucy mentioned, when is one awarded the prize of proving mastery within a specific practice?
While thinking this over, Natalie’s mentions of mastery based on context seemed to resonate with me. Additionally, I think that although a certain level of “mastery” is needed, it is important to alter the ways in which it is viewed. I would like to view “mastery” as multiple ways of understanding, rather than a definitive declaration of proving your excellence within a certain area of expertise. For example, students may have not “mastered” the ability to paint the Sistine Chapel as Michelangelo did, but they may be able to question its significance within the art world and identify the painting and techniques used. Therefore, exhibiting some sense of “mastery” in relation to this work of art.
Did that make sense? Who knows.
The point I’m trying to make is that reframing the ways in which we perceive the seemingly daunting elements of learning is imperative. Reframing mastery as a journey rather than a destination is imperative in allowing students to feel encouraged to learn rather than frighten them away from even trying.
Page,
ReplyDeleteLike everyone else who has already commented, I am also intrigued by the questions in your last paragraph and your inclusion of this beautiful artwork!
As a person who has many interests, I often question my abilities and wonder if I have yet reached the level of "mastery". However, after reading your post and doing some reflecting, I'm thinking is mastery even possible? Or is it something that we as a society made up to feel a sense of accomplishment? As Raven mentioned above, I believe the term "mastery" should be altered in the way that it is portrayed. Rather than focusing on the excellence aspect, mastery should be viewed as the ability to question or analyze different perspectives of a certain topic, subject, etc.
Page,
ReplyDeleteThank you for sharing your experiences with Kerry James Marshall. The way in which you connected the readings and applied them to his work just made sense to me! It made me consider my own literacy strengths and weaknesses and in which I could connect them to my own practice. In the Beuhl reading I filled out that chart asking us what we felt we had confidence in regarding our own literacies. I must admit there were only a few that I truly felt confident behind. But what made me feel better was, number one, the readings that emphasized our literacies can grow, and number two, your post in which you also admit that you have certain literacy strengths over others. It seems silly but we all want to feel like we are well rounded people and that we understand everything. I think what I truly loved about the readings this week was the feeling that we don’t need to be the best in everything.
Thanks
Ana
Hey Page! thank you for sharing your connection with Kerry James Marshall. Marshall’s work shows superb technical proficiency with layered storytelling bringing the portrayal of Black life to the forefront. In our Art Education cohort, he has been brought up in multiple discussions as an example of teaching various techniques. He makes the elements of collage, text, compositional balance, and color usage in his painting look effortless... It is not.
ReplyDeleteArtsy defines Old Masters as “most recognized European artists- mostly painters working between the Renaissance and 1800. The standard for art “mastery” has always been through the White Eurocentric offering. I think about representation when educating about literacy in the arts. Artists like Kerry James Marshall and Kehinde Wiley can easily replace “Old Masters” like Rembrandt and Caravaggio in teaching technique and painting competency. Natalie touches on this - Often times education tells a singular story about a discipline that is part of a canon.
I am far removed from High School, but I remember The Crucible and Beowulf were a part of my reading list. Neither of these works resonated with me and I wound up looking at spark notes for those books. Instead, I read literature that interested me. If we are trying to provide an understanding of a discipline and disrupt the status quo, we should include some relevance to how students identify and what they are interested in.
Author Malcolm Gladwell shares that to have true expertise at any skill you need to have practiced it for at least 10,000 hours. I struggle with this idea of “mastery” and reaching a pinnacle of understanding. Can mastery be subjective? Who is deciding this finish line of expertise?
Hi Page, I appreciate you sharing about your relationship with art. I've dealt with similar feelings of uncertainty when navigating unfamiliar topics. It's certainly refreshing to hear someone talk about the challenges of feeling out of touch with certain topics while being deeply interested in others. Your experience with the work of Kerry James Marshall's work sounds incredibly powerful. His work calls for the kind of interaction you describe in your post. To your point about the cultivation of a critical understanding of historical narratives, the barriers imposed by historical narratives can be significant, especially in a discipline such as art where Black voices have been historically silenced and overlooked. As a future educator, I completely agree with this and believe that it is essential for us to critically examine these narratives and consider how they may impact our student's experiences.
ReplyDeleteHi page, I really enjoyed your experience with art it was very vibrant and it felt very personal to you. I was introduced to Kerry James Marshall's work in my contemporary art history class, which I recommend everyone take if you can, where we learned about many artists from different backgrounds. Kerry James Marshall's work was extremely powerful in that class where we discussed his use of color and imagery. I heavily agree that the historical narratives are important to understanding his work and introducing students to more artists of color is incredibly important for encouraging art within communities of color
ReplyDeleteHey, howdy, hi Paige!
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, I wanted to say how much I appreciate you using the work of Kerry James Marshal as the vessel to steer the discussion!
I was thinking a lot about your question about "In what ways do you see historical narratives in your chosen discipline as a possible barrier for your future students", and I often worry about students being challenged on the relevancy of visual arts in their lives. Historically, art has been the subject to receive the least amount of funding and is often the first on the budgetary chopping block alongside music and theater. Since much of our modern public education system focuses on STEM subject, because they are the "most economically viable" despite the fact that the U.S. is outmatched compared to their global competitors, LOL. I worry about students becoming deterred from perusing their interest in the arts in addition to resource constraints and nurturing support systems. Not to mention the already existing educational, environmental, geographic, policy, etc. disparities between black, brown and white students...
I have no idea if this makes sense.