In writing 04 - July 2013 - Well how?

"How does art make you smart?" is not a question about how art transfers certain specific bits of knowledge or skills from teacher to learner. That interpretation of the question would be irrelevant because it could be anything in every possible way. It could even be nothing because art also might just confuse you and just raise questions.
So does the question refer to the way that art makes you reflect on certain things then? Again my answer is "no". I think that art makes you smart when it allows you to learn what YOU want to learn and helps you to reflect on what YOU need to reflect on.
Getting smart is not about following a master, guru or teacher, aligning yourself to his values, and copying his knowledge and skills. Getting smart is about discovering your very own authentic set of personal talents, intelligence and sensitivities. Getting smart is learning what this precious personal gift means to others and being encouraged to oblige yourself to develop it and put it to use.
So art makes people smart not by telling them what to do or think, but by allowing them or challenging them to position themselves publicly as subjects, so they can find out who they are, what they are capable off and what that means for them and for their community.
This way art gives us an opportunity to become active as human being and do more then to labor like animals or work like slaves. And it is this transition that adds the essential value we're looking for, in education but also in business or politics.

At the moment I'm writing an article for a special issue about learning democracy of the scientific journal "Policy Futures in Education". This issue explores the possible meanings of Gert Biesta's theory of public pedagogy. In this theory the ideas of thinkers like Ranciere, Mouffe and Arendt are combined to an insight that inspired my previous considerations. In my contribution I'll try to apply this theory on my first findings in my research.

In the Field 08 - June 2013 - Food for thought

Also found Johnny Cupcakes store 
on Martha's Vinyard

First case of my research is the art practice of Jeanne van Heeswijk. Her assistant told me that one of the first art projects Jeanne did was arranging a dinner. Not only the menu but also the location, the entourage, the seating at the table was composed to created a situation of optimal inspiration. Now as well in Rotterdam as in Liverpool one of the main activities Jeanne has initiated concern food: a neighborhood kitchen in Rotterdam and a bakery in Liverpool.
In the flux factory, my second case, I found out that for all the decades this organization exists they have had a thursday potluck at least every month and for a long period even every week. One or more artists would arrange the evening as an inspiring event and hard core "fluxers" consider this diner the core event of the factory.

Soon after I came here I visited the Highline. Here one of the New York performance veterans of the Fluxus movement Alison Knowles staged a performance called "make a salad". Together with the audience she prepared a massive salad and handed it out for free to the audience.
By the end of may I was invited by performance artist Richard Jochum to attend to his monthly event "diner a vingt" at the art space of the Emily Harvey Foundation one of the former strongholds of the Fluxus movement. He told me he was not shire wether this event was art but he did present it a few days later at the Bushwick Open Studio's event. His presentation was part of a program called: "We eat We are".

My third case "the colony" at Moma Ps1 appeared to be hosted by Anne Apparu … food artist. No need to explain that one of the main activities were happening around the diner table.

I remember the conclusions of a european investigation into European Cultural values in 2007. It reads that: "Food forms the most common means of cross-cultural contact". Maybe we should turn the museums and theaters into public kitchens.

Richard Jochum (2013) "Diner a Vingt"

In real life 07 - June 2013 - Hardship and dispair

To prevent that my research would be led and my findings would be biased by marketing or status anxiety I decided to seek my cases from the bottom up by visiting locations to see for myself and ask the people on the spot where to go. This method is actually nothing more then good old fashioned adventurous exploration including the hardship of getting desperately lost.
If I would have been looking for quiet common cases - like traditional art or schools - it would not have been to hard but now I had to cope with a long period of desperate search for situated art practices. These practices are quiet rare but also hard to recognize. This way I ended up in most remarkable places meeting remarkable people but it took a long time before I did find suitable cases.
I knew it would be hard and uncomfortable and I expected that the knowledge that this was the only way to find this type of unspoiled data would pull me through. But still I had my moments of despair. What if I would not find anything? Or if I would end up with some cases that turned out top be unsuitable? Like marco polo of columbus returning home to face his funders empty handed.
Nevertheless I must say that it was all worthwhile the risk. I did find beautiful pure data behind the facades and unaffected by PR. And even though I ended up in a couple of more or less formalized and reputed institutions my entrance was the backdoor and I managed to find my way to the work floor.
Besides these fine data - and I did not anticipate on it - I must conclude now that this exploration not only led me to a couple of suitable cases it also gave me a very good view on the cultural context of the New York art scene.
So let me encourage other researchers to run the risk of unprepared exploration and ask for mercy from their employers to be merciful if their courageous endeavor does not bare glorious bounty. In science finding nothing is still useful information.