The Art of War.jpg
(Mensaje se repite en Español)

Recently, I received the following query as to why I thought with the passage of Proposition 30, art programs have not been restored. Let me know if you agree or disagree with my answer and analysis of this question. 

 "Lenny, do you think that the Arts have a legal remedy, since they have been picked on to a far greater extent, and Arts programs are not being restored.  The new funding was supposed to restore programs, but the board did not use the money for this. Arts programs are still cut. Any suggestions?  Thanks." 

Two possible answers:

1. Arts are not core academic subjects like English, Math, Social Studies, and Science and, therefore, are not deemed essential, but are seen rather as a public school;

2. As the renaissance illustrated, core subjects exist within an arts context and are essential to giving a real world practical application for these hypothetical academic concepts.

The real problem with your question is that it tacitly buys into an invalid and skewed argument in that we have allowed the district, and the present forces that control public education, to define the terms of engagement regarding the nature of public education in 2013. If this is allowed to stand, we lose from the beginning of this unbalanced argument.  

Take a step back and look at how the rich educate their own children, while asking the simple question: If the arts are so unnecessary, then why are they so much an essential part of their children's academic formation? When you line up how they want public education to educate in juxtaposition to how the rich educate their children, you immediately see that critical analysis by a person capable or formulating their own world view is a non-negotiable essential for how the rich educate themselves. 

In seeking an answer to reconcile these fundamentally different views as to what is acceptable for the education of the 1% and the 99%- the critical thinking answer that seems to explain this apparent contradiction- is that public education as defined by the 1% has an agenda to privatize public education for their own financial profit, while dumbing down and creating a docile, subservient, and obedient 99% that no longer has the ability to question their authority.

NSA whistle blower Edward Snowden made a comment about the unconstitutional wiretapping of all Americans electronic communications that is equally applicable to what is going on in public education: We are rapidly losing the ability to object to corporate government's exclusively self-serving agenda, if we don't have a public dialogue now about the nature of American society in the near future- whether the subject is privacy or public education-. then the 1% will determine who we are in total derogation of the equal opportunity based on work and not class that is supposed to be at the foundation of this country as memorialized in our constitution.

If you or someone you know has been targeted and are in the process of being dismissed and need legal defense, get in touch:

En Español

Recientemente, recibí la siguiente consulta de por qué pensé con la aprobación de la Proposición 30, no se han restaurado los programas de arte. Déjame saber si está de acuerdo o en desacuerdo con mi respuesta y el análisis de esta cuestión.

 "Lenny, ¿crees que las artes tienen un recurso legal, ya que han sido recogidos en un grado mucho mayor, y no se está restaurando programas de artes. Los nuevos fondos se supone que restaurar los programas, pero el Consejo no utilizar el dinero para esto. programas de artes todavía se cortan. ¿Alguna sugerencia? Gracias ".

Dos posibles respuestas:

1. Artes no son materias académicas básicas como Inglés, Matemáticas, Ciencias Sociales, y Ciencia y, por lo tanto, no se consideran esenciales, pero se ven más bien como un lujo ... en la escuela pública;

2. En el renacimiento se ilustra, existen materias básicas en un contexto artes y son esenciales para dar una aplicación práctica del mundo real para estos conceptos académicos hipotéticos.

El verdadero problema con tu pregunta es que tácitamente compra en un argumento no válido y sesgada en que hemos permitido que el distrito, y los actuales fuerzas que controlan la educación pública, para definir los términos de compromiso con respecto a la naturaleza de la educación pública en 2013. Si esto se deja en reposo, perdemos desde el principio de este argumento no balanceadas.

Dar un paso atrás y ver cómo los ricos educar a sus propios hijos, al tiempo que pedía una simple pregunta: ¿Si el arte es tan innecesario, entonces ¿por qué son tanto una parte esencial de la formación académica de sus hijos? Al alinear la forma en que quieren que la educación pública para educar en yuxtaposición a cómo los ricos educar a sus hijos, se ve inmediatamente que el análisis crítico por una persona capaz o formular su propia visión del mundo es fundamental no negociable de cómo los ricos educarse.

En la búsqueda de una respuesta a reconciliar estas opiniones muy diferentes sobre lo que es aceptable para la educación del 1% y el 99% - la respuesta pensamiento crítico que parece explicar esta aparente contradicción es que la educación pública como se define por el 1% tiene una agenda de privatización de la educación pública para su propio beneficio económico, mientras embrutecimiento y la creación de un dócil, sumiso y obediente 99% que ya no tiene la capacidad de cuestionar su autoridad.

NSA denunciante Edward Snowden hizo un comentario sobre la interceptación inconstitucionalidad de todas las comunicaciones electrónicas de los estadounidenses que es igualmente aplicable a lo que está pasando en la educación pública: Estamos perdiendo rápidamente la capacidad de objetar exclusivamente egoísta agenda del gobierno corporativo, si nosotros no 't tiene un diálogo público ahora acerca de la naturaleza de la sociedad estadounidense en el futuro cercano, si el tema es la privacidad o la educación pública-. entonces el 1% va a determinar lo que somos una derogación total de la igualdad de oportunidades basada en el trabajo y no la clase que se supone que es el fundamento de este país como conmemorado en nuestra constitución.

Si usted o alguien que usted conoce ha sido dirigida y está en proceso de ser despedido y necesita defensa legal, póngase en contacto:


06 2013


The study of humanities is disappearing itoo, as colleges become ‘training schools’ for a career. From a recent NY Times article:
“in this new era of lengthening unemployment lines and shrinking university endowments, questions about the importance of the humanities in a complex and technologically demanding world have taken on new urgency. Previous economic downturns have often led to decreased enrollment in the disciplines loosely grouped under the term “humanities” — which generally include languages, literature, the arts, history, cultural studies, philosophy and religion. Many in the field worry that in this current crisis those areas will be hit hardest.”
Once upon a time “ the idea that elite universities like Yale, sprawling public systems like Wisconsin and smaller private colleges like Lewis and Clark have shared for generations is that a traditional liberal arts education is, by definition, not intended to prepare students for a specific vocation. Rather, the critical thinking, civic and historical knowledge and ethical reasoning that the humanities develop have a different purpose: They are prerequisites for personal growth and participation in a free democracy, regardless of career choice.”
Humanities studies, and the arts, gives the brain more that just the information about human endeavors in the past. It provides context for the present, and important practice in the most crucial skill that human’s possess: critical thinking skills. IT TAKES PRACTICE TO THINK.
A personal example if I may: my son majored in humanities and took a minor in the arts, along with a business minor. He is now the CEO of an internet security company which he founded. His communication skills support not only his business, but the community he lives in.
I was an English teacher in NYC, and was awarded the Educator of Excellence’ award in 1998. I integrated into a communication arts curriculum, a full art curriculum which allowed the children, one week out of every four, to explore drawing,painting and design, and apply artful expressions to their writing projects.I was selected to be a cohort for the New Standards research because my unique curriculum had such spectacular results… YOU be the 13 year old kids learned to THINK and thus to write and speak and… well, YOU ARE SPOT ON LENNY!
That said, art in most schools is no more that a diversion, and is mostly arts and crafts, producing projects to ‘take home’ and hang on the fridge.
Ed Hirsch knows that ‘shared knowledge’ is the key to democracy. That knowledge of humankind’s past and its potential is essential. The human mind needs to compare what he sees with what he knows (prior knowledge) in order to do the fist step in CRITICAL THOUGHT — which is to analyze.
If our citizens know little or nothing about human thought and creativity, but learn how to run a computer program or a hedge fund, then the future is lost.
The enlightened American civilization is OVER!

Sorry, but as a teacher in elementary school, the arts teachers have been useless. I am 120% for art, but the activities that I and other teachers at my school provide are far superior. Most of them do as little as possible, expect the classroom teacher to spend time and money for their project and leave a mess behind. The dance and drama teachers are even worse.

Maybe in middle or high school where art is more specialized, it's worth it.

That is anedotal evidence that reflects poor leadership at your school. The teachers may be ineffective and impolite, but I don't see how younger children can learn much of anything without the benefit of self-expression and appreciation for arts, which include literature, music, visual art, theater and much much more.

That is not what I stated. The teachers at my school, including myself provide excellent art activities, including music and dance. The traveling arts teachers who come from the district do not do the job as well as we do ourselves.Please read the post thoroughly before you comment erroneously.

Frankly, your gripe about other teachers is oretty off topic and basically betrays your lack of communication skills, teacher. This is about something far more profound than your workplace beefs but between your lack of reading comprehension and failure to employ meaningful rhetoric, you sort of make us all look petty and stupid. The cowardly who have not got cajones enough to post their names are away bigger burden than traveling arts teachers rushing from gig to gig.

Anyone who is truly educated as opposed to trained understands that arts an inherent element in any core curriculium. I would assert that Dickens' depiction of London during the Industrial Revolution is as viable a source for history as slavish scrutiny of documents, diaries and newspapers. There are also social and political elements in a novel like Oliver Twist. Doesn't the art of Norman Rockwell juxtaposed with Andy Warhol offer incredible insightsabout the American psyche? And De Vinci's work illustrates how science and art are symbiotic exercises in psychological evolution?
LAUSD wants to snuff out the live wire that is the human mind. The powers behind it prefer numb, obedient wage slaves to rebels, which is what artists are.
We can talk about this or we can do something. Which do you suppose will serve our youngsters and this community well?

Leave a comment