Art is acedemic too you know!

My campus newspaper often does a special survey where they question students "ARH or Noyce?" This question is meant to create a tally of students who like ARH - where most of the humanities classes are taught or Noyce - the science center.

Yesterday I was in Noyce when asked the vague question "ARH or Noyce" stunned I looked at the questioner and answered "The question should be Bucksbaum or Noyce, so Noyce." He laughed and then carried on his survey to other students in the study area. Apart from the obvious bias of questioning students already in the science center, I began to think about the bias against arts at Grinnell College. It's not a huge apparent divide, but it's large enough to be noticeable.

I spend hours of my day in Bucksbaum, with class and Theatre (both paid and volunteer) and working on projects I can spend half a day in Bucksbaum easily. I know I am in the minority of students at Grinnell but other Theatre students and artists understand my commitment to this building. Not many classes outside of the arts meet in Bucksbaum, only a few English classes are ever moved into these spaces and they are normally the Shakespeare or theatrically driven English courses. I am not saying the system is flawed, because I understand we only have a few class rooms and the rest of the spaces are designed for studio or artistic spaces. I simply wish the arts and artists on campus were recognized as academic instead of creating a divided where only ARH and Noyce are considered acedemic hubs. The work I do in Theatre and the arts is as acedemically drived, with research and procedure taking presidence. Theatre and art also have history and theory that have to be understood, critiqued, and learned.