Jeri Kelly
Art 211.02
‘Art Education Authors You Should Know’
Paul Duncum has been working in the field of art education for the past three
decades, and has held a teaching position at the University of Illinois at ChampaignUrbana since 2003. In addition to his position at that university as a professor of art
education, he also serves as the Art Education Division and Program Chair as well as
Coordinator of Graduate Art Education Programs. He is an accomplished author on
topics concerning the fields of visual culture and art education, having published a
multitude of essays in prestigious journals including Journal of Research in Art and
Education, International Journal of Education Through Art, and The International
Journal of Art & Design. Duncum’s research is focused not only on the relationship of
critical theory and visual culture to art education, but also the ways that children’s
drawings are impacted by social influences.
His article “Subjects and Themes in Children’s Unsolicited Drawing and
Gender Socialization” (Duncum, n.d.), provided an overview of past research on the
topic, but focused primarily on the historical consistency of gender differences. He
concluded with a summary of how general themes in children’s drawings reflect
upon their experiences and ideas at this stage in their lives.
Most of the research conducted on this topic has been done in Western
cultures, and this has an impact on the gender-role differences found in children’s
drawings. Basically, throughout the 20th century, boys have grown up exposed to
ideas like cowboys and Indians, G.I. Joe, Hot Wheels, etc.; while girls have grown up
exposed to Barbie, the Easy Bake Oven, and Strawberry Shortcake. In other words,
Western gender socialization encourages boys to draw themes of conflict, violence,
power, and physical action while girls are encouraged to express feminine, ‘pretty’,
decorative themes in their art. This is not necessarily taught; it just is what it is.
(‘Sugar and spice and everything nice, that’s what little girls are made of. Snakes
and snails and puppy dog tails, that’s what little boys are made of’…we all know
this!)
Despite these differences between genders, Duncum recognized that
exceptions to the rule do exist, but these exceptions only highlight the extent of the
pressures of socialization. For example, if Susie is drawing a fierce monster in battle
with weapons and explosions, she may be thought of as “different.” Because of this,
Duncum comments on the gender schema theory, which suggests that usually
without even being consciously aware of it, children select their subjects according
to what they conceive to be appropriate for their gender. I found this concept very
interesting in that children might actually be unconsciously conforming to what
their peers and teachers consider to be normal in their artwork.
Duncum also noted that although subject matter preferences have changed
with time (i.e. volcanoes are now rockets), underlying themes have stayed the same
(both are examples of sudden, violent action). Also, boys and girls may draw what
appears to be the same subject (such as a horse) but for different purposes (girls
conveying nurturance, beauty; boys conveying power). Overall, Duncum’s idea that
children mainly convey a quest for identity in their drawings is very powerful.
Although boys and girls will (most likely) always draw different things, it is
important to remember that all students are simply trying to make sense of their
world by expressing their own personal experiences.
The author further elaborates on the concept of social influences on children
by addressing the impact of consumer goods and media imagery on children’s
(specifically girls’) self-concepts in relation to merchandise such as Bratz dolls in his
essay “Aesthetics, Popular Visual Culture, and Designer Capitalism” (Duncum, 2007).
Regarding the inclusion of popular visual culture in art education, Duncum (2007)
states:
The aestheticisation of everyday life involves our extensive exposure to the
media, the consumer products we buy, the way people without formal
training in the visual arts organise their environments, and how we all
construct our appearance for ourselves and for others. (p. 288)
Bratz dolls are used as an example of capitalist consumer culture as having a
direct impact on young girls’ self-concepts and morals due to the fact that “Their
ensemble of features could be called ‘hooker chic’” (p. 289). Duncum goes on to
describe the conflict between children’s desire for these dolls and parents’
reluctance to buy them by stating, “By combining what appears overt sexuality with
minority ethnicity and low class associations, the dolls offer a street-wise, ghetto
aesthetic that alarms parents as much as it appeals to their children as cool” (p.
289). Duncum concludes that students can benefit from the discussion of specific
aspects of popular visual culture, such as Bratz dolls, that impact their ideas about
themselves and the world around them as represented through visual imagery.
References
Duncum, P. (n.d.). Subjects and themes in children’s unsolicited drawing and gender
socialization. Retrieved from Dr. Daniella Barroqueiro, Illinois State
University. Awaiting further citation details.
Duncum, P. (2007). Aesthetics, popular visual culture, and designer capitalism.
International Journal of Art & Design Education, 26(3), 285-295.
doi:10.1111/j.1476-8070.2007.00539.x.
Dr. Paul Duncum. Retrieved from
https://netfiles.uiuc.edu/pduncum/www/index.html