{"id":2171,"date":"2021-07-10T07:48:39","date_gmt":"2021-07-10T12:48:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/educationalrenaissance.com\/?p=2171"},"modified":"2023-05-14T19:32:46","modified_gmt":"2023-05-15T00:32:46","slug":"apprenticeship-in-the-arts-traditions-and-divisions","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/educationalrenaissance.com\/2021\/07\/10\/apprenticeship-in-the-arts-traditions-and-divisions\/","title":{"rendered":"Apprenticeship in the Arts, Part 1: Traditions and Divisions"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The previous two articles have paved the way both for our discussion of Aristotle\u2019s intellectual virtue of techne<\/em>, artistry or craftsmanship, as well as the intellectual virtue of phronesis<\/em>, practical wisdom or prudence. In a strict sense, the analogy between artistry and morality<\/a> is aside from our central argument, which consists in working out the implications of each of Aristotle\u2019s five intellectual virtues as educational goals for school, curriculum, classroom, and pedagogy. The moral virtues are therefore outside the purview of our main purpose, even if they are organically connected to phronesis <\/em>or practical wisdom. In addition, the moral virtues\u2019 similarities and dissimilarities with the arts<\/a> might seem irrelevant to our discussion of the arts themselves. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

On the other hand, this extended digression, which took its cue from Aristotle\u2019s Nicomachean Ethics<\/em> Book II<\/a>, has provided an opportunity for us to lay the foundations of Aristotle\u2019s distinctive vision in ways that we could not easily do without. For instance, the fact that Aristotle can refer off-handedly to arts as diverse as building, lyre-playing, navigation, medical practice, grammar and music helps to illustrate the breadth of the category of techne<\/em> for him. Before the canonization of the liberal arts as \u201cacademic subjects\u201d, there is a helpful clarity with which Plato and Aristotle understand them as productive arts, alongside other forms of craftsmanship.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

But perhaps more important considerations even than this are the power of habit, the place of instruction<\/a>, and the essential role of exercise, training and focused practice<\/a> in the acquisition of both character and craftsmanship. Since time immemorial, it has been tempting to over-emphasize the knowledge-transfer approach to education instead of the more practice-oriented apprenticeship in the arts. While we could blame such a phenomenon on the Enlightenment, the Sophists of Socrates\u2019s day arguably made the same error, as did medieval and Renaissance educators of all sorts. The universal human tendency to take short-cuts, even to our detriment, can probably account for our neglect of a fully orbed apprenticeship. If we could simply pass on a few memorable aphorisms or a book of \u201cinformation\u201d, rather than the considerable personal and temporal investment of apprenticing a learner through the stages of novice, apprentice, and journeyman, then why wouldn\u2019t we simply do the former? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In this article we will explore the apprenticeship model of training in the arts by situating the arts in time and place, and defending our five fold division of the arts, which adds two categories and slightly reframes the divisions of Chris Hall\u2019s and Kevin Clark and Ravi Jain\u2019s three fold paradigm. To their liberal, fine and common arts, we add athletics, games and sports, and the professions and trades. But before we can explain why, we must situate the arts as traditions in place and time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n