0 1 inio
TAKE THIS DEGREE AND SHOVE IT
By MARTIN SANTALUCIA During an activity in my art history class the
COPY EDITOR professor projected two paintings at the front of
mFsso7s@psu.EDu the room. The first was by Rembrandt van Rijn,
famous for his mastery of shadow and light, and
the other was by Jackson Pollock, noted for his pieces that consist of paint thrown
across enormous canvasses.
As aficionados-in-training, the professor set to us the task of comparing and contrasting
the two works. I was among the first selected to present my analysis. Admittedly, I
knew the correct answer, that is, the answer the professor was looking for. Instead,
however, I opted to interject my true opinion on the subject; that the primary difference
between the pieces was that Rembrant's required talent to create and that I could
have painted the Pollock in my garage the previous weekend. Needless to say the
professor was disappointed in my contribution and disagreed with my analysis, though
no explanation was provided to me as to how getting drunk and throwing paint at a
canvass is proof of talent or genius.
The only satisfactory answer I have ever received as to why a Pollock is worth
millions of dollars came from Orson Welles' 1976 documentary "F for Fake". In the
film Welles states that art only has value because an elite "expert" class deems it has
value. Authentic or otherwise, all a work needs is a nod from one of these experts to
be worth a fortune. During the film an artist brags of forging a Picasso and then having
it authenticated and appraised for thousands of dollars. Laughing, the artist throws the
"authentic" Picasso in to a fire and watches it burn.
With my degree from the College of Liberal Arts nearly complete, I cannot help but see
a disturbing correlation between this fraudulent world of art and that of academia.
Lacking firm boundaries and pre-requisites, a student of the liberal arts' transcript
quickly becomes a disorienting hodge-podge of miscellaneous coursework.
Understanding the relationship between the contents of a physics class, a Spanish
class, and an introductory psychology class is difficult explaining why all of these
classes are required to one day qualify a student as a political scientist (whatever that
is) makes the final leap to impossibility.
This splattering of courses across a transcript is considered a worth-while education
for the same reason Jackson Pollock's splattering of paint across a canvass is
considered art it has been deemed as
such by "experts"; experts who have
significant financial interest in the sale
of their respective, otherwise worthless,
goods
While Socrates and Rousseau have been
studied for centuries, the ever-increasing
demands of a technology-driven world
leave little room for the abstract thought
philosophy and similarly esoteric fields
of study are built upon. However, to
dump these musty works in a generic
western civilizations class and forget
about them would be heresy against all
of western culture and, more importantly,
leave entire university departments
unemployed. Retaining these jobs only
requires that courses be vindicated by
full classrooms.
Destined to warm the empty seats of
practically useless classes are liberal arts
majors, students conned by high school
guidance counselors into believing
that their fortunes could be made with
a degree in Comparative Literature or
Religious Studies. By comprising liberal
arts degrees of these left-over classes,
universities have found an ingenious
way of turning their trash into gold and
students find that rather than getting a
degree in what they selected as their
major they are getting an education in
generically being educated.
To say all liberal arts degrees do not
November 18 2009
APITAL TIMES
have applications outside the academic world is unfair. The structure of a college
linguistics program, for example, provides an excellent opportunity to learn and study
new languages, a skill with applications across numerous industries. Still, many of
these programs are inflated to four-year degrees with unrelated and useless material. I
can speak about the political science major here at Penn State from personal experience.
By the end of this year, my second full year at Penn State, I will have completed all
of the classes directly relating to my major. During these two years I also consistently
maintained jobs relating to politics, campaigning, and government.
From a practical standpoint my experiences at work have proven far more relevant to
my goals than my classes, however, I understand the wide range of material presented
in the classroom can have use further down the road. What is frustrating is that even
though I have essentially completed my formal political science education I must now
spend two years taking gym and art classes to fluff my two-year education into a
four-year degree two years that would be spent more effectively obtaining hands
on experience in the field. Ironically, my education is preventing me from getting an
education.
Universities need to put more time, money and energy into developing actual liberal
arts degrees. I have three basic recommendations for improving the liberal arts college
based on my experience.
Degrees must be based around practicality rather than academia. If a course cannot
justify its existence by directly furthering a student's education, do not use it. Do not
throw it out, though. Put the curriculum on a bookshelf in some dark room in case it
is ever needed; much like how the United States keeps a contingency plan incase we
ever need to invade Canada.
Do not only hire professors and consultants from the world of academia. Many who
have wallpapered their offices with degrees lack the nuanced experiences of experts
from the field. Most liberal arts degrees are not technically intensive and a proper
education requires that students be aware of those subtleties. Though it may feel
counter-intuitive someone with only an undergraduate degree, or no college degree at
all, may be the best expert you can find on a given subject provided they have the years
of experience to back up their opinions. The opposite is equally as true; just because
someone has two doctoral degrees does not mean they have any clue as to what they
are talking about.
Finally, if when a satisfactory
curriculum for a degree is completed
it is only two years long either let it
be or find a valuable way to fill those
remaining two years. Ballroom dancing
and yoga do not count as a valuable uses
of my time and money.
To the world of academia, consider
this your bluff being called. For years
you have explained away the whiskey
inspired "Pollock-esque" requirements
of the supposed educations you peddle.
Given the constant increases in tuition
and the exorbitant cost of textbooks
those convoluted explanations can no
longer be tolerated. From now on if I am
going to pay $50,000 for a piece of paper
it better be an original Rembrandt.
In the upcoming weeks I should finally
be getting my shoelaces back from the
registrar's office and with that I will
conclude my sentence here at Penn
State Harrisburg. Thank you to those
who have read my ramblings over the
years. It has been quite an experience.
Unfortunately, now that this piece has
been published I fear my last days in
Middletown will be spent warding off
an angry tweed-clad mob of Ph.D.s from
slashing my tires; though considering
how my time here played out, it is a
fitting end.