Reflecting on postmodernisms

The term postmodern has been traced to the historian Arnold Toynbee who coined it about 1939 to refer to the close of the modern period of history which, according to him, occurred in the last quarter of the l9th century. Postmodern politics have been traced to European student and worker revolts in 1968. In the visual arts, some critics have argued that the decisive year was 1964, when Andy Warhol first exhibited his Brillo boxes. Postmodern architecture was identified in the 1970s. Postmodernism became pervasive in academic culture during the 1980s and entered art education literature early in the 1990s.

Definitions of postmodernism are as varied as past uses of the term. To some, the word carries negative connotations due to the tendency of postmodernists to critique and deconstruct the big ideas of Enlightenment philosophers. Postmodernists have offered critiques of realism, universalism, and individualism, of optimistic belief in the advances of progress. They argue that the grand metanarratives of history (like those written by Toynbee) should be abandoned in favor of modest, localized narratives. They assert that unified visions of high culture and the power of the avant garde are being replaced by art that is eclectic and ambiguous, characterized not by style but by multiple references to and appropriations from popular commercial culture. Perhaps because much postmodern theory developed in literary criticism and cultural studies, the focus on science, logic, and rationality characteristic of modernism has given way to an emphasis on the text, narrative, and interpretation.

While art educators in higher education have been dropping postmodernist references for nearly a decade, many K-12 art specialists find the topic difficult, boring, or irrelevant to classroom life. The authors in this issue argue that postmodernism does have implications for thinking about art teaching and learning, for curriculum development and classroom practice. Social and intellectual changes grouped under the label of postmodernism already affect the contexts of art education. For example, many school districts have been trying to replace the modern notion of one single best, most efficient system of management with sitebased management, shared decision-making teams, or charter schools to permit consideration of alternative points of view. Art teachers who want to introduce their students to contemporary art recognize that artists today do not use the aesthetics of significant form and self-expression predominant for most of our century. The modern belief that the thoughts and voice of one person-often a white male-should guide theory and practice is giving way to more interest in listening to previously ignored voices, to the stories of women and other "minorities."

In his statement as incoming editor, published in the Septemebr 1998 issue of Art Education, Paul Bolin wrote that he wants to hear from a medley of voices, a multi-voiced choir of writers for the journal. during my 3-year term as editor, ending with this issue, 149 voices have sung through the articles and Instructional Resources published in the journal. One voice, that of Elliot Eisner, has been heard in four performances-two reprinted articles, one double-length artE cle, and one rejoinder to a response to that article. Fourteen authors have had two articles published; 7 of those 14 wrote one of their two articles with a co-author. Nineteen articles or Instructional Resources published between January 1996 and November 1998 had 2 authors; one had 3 authors; three had 4 authors, and one had 6 authors. These duets, trios, quartets, and sextet have allowed voices to sing in harmony or counterpoint.

One of my goals as editor has been to broaden the range of voices heard through our professional journal. Due to the structure of higher education, expectations for research, writing, and publication are greater in universities than in K-12 schools. Reflecting these expectations, 62% of the authors from 1996 through 1998 come from NAEA's Higher Education Division. In part because Instructional Resources are usually developed by museum educators, 20% of our authors have come from that division. To my delight, 10% of the authors have been elementary art teachers, but the Middle Level, Secondary, and Supervision/ Administration divisions have each contributed less than 3% of the authors. Women have been 62% of our authors, and men 38%. The Western region has led all other regions with 42% of authors; 21% have been from each of the Eastern and Pacific regions, with 14% from the Southeastern region. We might, therefore, conclude that the "average" author for Art Education from 1996 through 1998 has been a woman art educator in higher education from the Western region. In a postmodern spirit, however, Iam more aware of differences among our authors than of a monolithic profile.

One of thejoys of serving as editor has been working with the art educators who choose to write and submit manuscripts for review and-we hope-eventual publication.

My thanks go to all the authors who have prepared material for our journal, but even more to the dedicated reviewers who have been reading and commenting on submitted manuscripts. Thanks also to Sarah Tambucci, NAEA Past President, who invited me to serve as editor, and to the NAEA staff in eston:

Paul Bolin brings many skills to his new position. He is a clear, thoughtful writer committed to strengthening art education by broadening the topics addressed in the journal, as well as the range of writers published. Paul will conduct his choir with grace and a postmodern sensitivity to metaphor, critical theory, and the importance of praxis.