1. prehaus, haus, and post-haus
shifting models in foundation art teaching
dan collins
core coordinator, arizona state university
In the eighties there is a marked shift in the reception of photography that deghettoizes the practice from being a practice parallel to painting and sculpture to one that is today on parwith these expressions.
This change is grounded in conceptual art, where photography was used to document actions and ideas, and thus became part of the artist’s expression, rather than the photographer’s expression. In the works were about to look at we think today of these practitioners as artists who use photography rather than as photographers.
We will see that the conceptual thread wound in the seventies continues through all of these eighties works.
It is also important to consider that these artists we are about to look at have less interest in making photographic images, than in showing the construction and betraying our conventions for looking at those images.
These works become constructed pictures full of legible signs that the artists call to our attention.

2. bauhaus history
The Bauhaus was born in after Walter Gropius was invited to combine the schools of art and craft in Weimar, Germany.
Ordinary craftsmen as well as famous artists such as Paul Klee and Vassily Kandinsky were hired to teach.
Gropius felt that an understanding of materials, which was taught in workshops that included metalwork, carpentry, interior design, construction, and furniture making, must be mastered before architecture. His goal was to create:
A clear, organic architecture, whose inner logic will be radiant
and naked, unencumbered by lying facades and trickeries; we want an architecture adapted to our world of machines, radios and fast motor cars, and architecture whose function is clearly recognizable in the relation of its forms (Stokstad 1981).
In the eighties there is a marked shift in the reception of photography that deghettoizes the practice from being a practice parallel to painting and sculpture to one that is today on parwith these expressions.
This change is grounded in conceptual art, where photography was used to document actions and ideas, and thus became part of the artist’s expression, rather than the photographer’s expression. In the works were about to look at we think today of these practitioners as artists who use photography rather than as photographers.
We will see that the conceptual thread wound in the seventies continues through all of these eighties works.
It is also important to consider that these artists we are about to look at have less interest in making photographic images, than in showing the construction and betraying our conventions for looking at those images.
These works become constructed pictures full of legible signs that the artists call to our attention.

3. PREHAUS, HAUS, AND POSTHAUS
Walter Gropius, Main building at Dessau, 1926
Bauhaus
Walter Gropius
1926
Dessau, Germany

4. bauhaus history: not monolithic
Three different geographic locations with different curricular emphases:
Weimer ( )
Dessau (1925 – 1932)
Berlin (1932 – 1933)
Three different architect-directors:
Walter Gropius from 1919 to 1928,
Hannes Meyer from 1928 to 1930 and
Ludwig Mies van der Rohe from 1930 until 1933
The Bauhaus is often solely remembered for its iconic buildings designed and built in Dessau by Walter Gropius. But in fact, the school had three distinct iterations in three separate geographic locations—Weimer ( ); Dessau (1925 – 1932); and Berlin (1932 – 1933), under three different architect-directors: Walter Gropius from 1919 to 1928, Hannes Meyer from 1928 to 1930 and Ludwig Mies van der Rohe from 1930 until 1933, when the school was closed by its own leadership under pressure from the Nazi regime.
Weimar ( )
Dessau (1925 – 1932)
Berlin (1932 – 1933)

5. Bauhaus History: Weimar (1919 – 1925)
The school was founded by Walter Gropius in Weimar in 1919 as a merger of the Grand Ducal School of Arts and Crafts and the Weimar Academy of Fine Art. Its roots lay in the arts and crafts school founded by the Grand Duke of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach in 1906 and directed by Belgian Art Nouveau architect Henry van de Velde.[8] When van de Velde was forced to resign in 1915 because he was Belgian, he suggested Gropius, Hermann Obrist and August Endell as possible successors. In 1919, after delays caused by the destruction of World War I and a lengthy debate over who should head the institution and the socio-economic meanings of a reconciliation of the fine arts and the applied arts (an issue which remained a defining one throughout the school's existence), Gropius was made the director of a new institution integrating the two called the Bauhaus.[9] In the pamphlet for an April 1919 exhibition entitled "Exhibition of Unknown Architects", Gropius proclaimed his goal as being "to create a new guild of craftsmen, without the class distinctions which raise an arrogant barrier between craftsman and artist." Gropius' neologism Bauhaus references both building and the Bauhütte, a premodern guild of stonemasons.[10] The early intention was for the Bauhaus to be a combined architecture school, crafts school, and academy of the arts. In 1919 Swiss painter Johannes Itten, German-American painter Lyonel Feininger, and German sculptor Gerhard Marcks, along with Gropius, comprised the faculty of the Bauhaus. By the following year their ranks had grown to include German painter, sculptor and designer Oskar Schlemmer who headed the theater workshop, and Swiss painter Paul Klee, joined in 1922 by Russian painter Wassily Kandinsky. A tumultuous year at the Bauhaus, 1922 also saw the move of Dutch painter Theo van Doesburg to Weimar to promote De Stijl ("The Style"), and a visit to the Bauhaus by Russian Constructivist artist and architect El Lissitzky.[11]
The school had its roots in an arts and crafts school founded in 1906 and directed by Belgian Art Nouveau architect Henry van de Velde, a Belgian..

6. Bauhaus History: Dessau (1925 – 1932) PREHAUS, HAUS, AND POSTHAUS
Walter Gropius, Main building at Dessau, 1926
Bauhaus
Walter Gropius
1926
Dessau, Germany

7. Bauhaus History: Berlin (1932 – 1933)
In late 1932, Mies rented a derelict factory in Berlin to use as the new Bauhaus with his own money. The students and faculty rehabilitated the building, painting the interior white. The school operated for ten months without further interference from the Nazi Party. In 1933, the Gestapo closed down the Berlin school. Mies protested the decision, eventually speaking to the head of the Gestapo, who agreed to allow the school to re-open. However, shortly after receiving a letter permitting the opening of the Bauhaus, Mies and the other faculty agreed to voluntarily shut down the school
Although neither the Nazi Party nor Hitler himself had a cohesive architectural policy before they came to power in 1933, Nazi writers like Wilhelm Frick and Alfred Rosenberg had already labeled the Bauhaus "un-German" and criticized its modernist styles, deliberately generating public controversy over issues like flat roofs. Increasingly through the early 1930s, they characterized the Bauhaus as a front for communists and social liberals. Indeed, a number of communist students loyal to Meyer moved to the Soviet Union when he was fired in 1930.
Even before the Nazis came to power, political pressure on Bauhaus had increased. The Nazi movement, from nearly the start, denounced the Bauhaus for its “degenerate art", and the Nazi regime was determined to crack down on what it saw as the foreign, probably Jewish influences of "cosmopolitan modernism." Despite Gropius's protestations that as a war veteran and a patriot his work had no subversive political intent, the Berlin Bauhaus was pressured to close in April Emigrants did succeed, however, in spreading the concepts of the Bauhaus to other countries, including the “New Bauhaus” of Chicago: Mies decided to emigrate to the United States for the directorship of the School of Architecture at the Armour Institute (now Illinois Institute of Technology) in Chicago and to seek building commissions.[a] Curiously, however, some Bauhaus influences lived on in Nazi Germany. When Hitler's chief engineer, Fritz Todt, began opening the new autobahn (highways) in 1935, many
In late 1932, Mies rented a derelict factory in Berlin to use as the new Bauhaus with his own money. The students and faculty rehabilitated the building, painting the interior white. The school operated for ten months without further interference from the Nazi Party. In 1933, the Gestapo closed down the Berlin school. Mies protested the decision, eventually speaking to the head of the Gestapo, who agreed to allow the school to re-open. However, shortly after receiving a letter permitting the opening of the Bauhaus, Mies and the other faculty agreed to voluntarily shut down the school

8. Bauhaus Vorkurs history: not monolithic.
Three different geographic locations with different “foundations coordinators”:
Weimer (1919 – 1925) Johannes Itten wrote the original Vorkurs emphasizing material discovery and personal expression.
Dessau (1925 – 1928) Lazlo Moholy Nagy rewrote the Vorkurs to emphasize integration of art, technology, and industry. Albers assisted.
Dessau (1928 – 1933) Josef Albers directed the Vorkurs.
Berlin (1932 – 1933). Albers was assistant director in Berlin under Mies.
Johannes Itten
at Weimar
( )
Lazlo Moholy Nagy
Dessau (1925 – 1928)
Josef A;lbers
Dessau (1920 – 1931)
Berlin (1932 – 1933)

9. Bauhaus Curriculum
In the eighties there is a marked shift in the reception of photography that deghettoizes the practice from being a practice parallel to painting and sculpture to one that is today on parwith these expressions.
This change is grounded in conceptual art, where photography was used to document actions and ideas, and thus became part of the artist’s expression, rather than the photographer’s expression. In the works were about to look at we think today of these practitioners as artists who use photography rather than as photographers.
We will see that the conceptual thread wound in the seventies continues through all of these eighties works.
It is also important to consider that these artists we are about to look at have less interest in making photographic images, than in showing the construction and betraying our conventions for looking at those images.
These works become constructed pictures full of legible signs that the artists call to our attention.
Abenakt = evening act gruppe werk = group work ; werkstatt =

10. Bauhaus Vorkurs History: Johannes Itten 1919-1922
From 1919 to 1922 the school was shaped by the pedagogical and aesthetic ideas of Johannes Itten, who taught the Vorkurs or 'preliminary course' that was the introduction to the ideas of the Bauhaus.
[Itten was heavily influenced in his teaching by the ideas of Maria Montessori, Johann Pestalozzi, Franz Cižek, and Friedrich Fröbel.
From 1919 to 1922 the school was shaped by the pedagogical and aesthetic ideas of Johannes Itten, who taught the Vorkurs or 'preliminary course' that was the introduction to the ideas of the Bauhaus.
[Itten was heavily influenced in his teaching by the ideas of Franz Cižek and Friedrich Wilhelm August Fröbel.
On the recommendation of Gropius’s first wife, Alma Mahler, Johannes Itten was appointed to teach at Weimar. Itten had achieved some acclaim from his art school in Vienna that had incorporated ideas from Cizek, Pestalozzi, Montessori, and Froebel. The entering class of 1919 – 1920 was extremely varied in their ages and backgrounds. “The samples of their work submitted with their applications,” wrote Itten (1965) “showed little individuality” (p. 104). In order to get a better idea about the talent and nature of the applicant, he proposed to Gropius that students be admitted for one provisional semester. This semester was called the Vorkurs or basic foundation course, and Gropius gave Itten full control over it.
Itten was also influenced by the work of Der Blaue Reiter group in Munich as well as the work of Austrian Expressionist Oskar Kokoschka. The influence of German Expressionism favored by Itten was analogous in some ways to the fine arts side of the ongoing debate. This influence culminated with the addition of Der Blaue Reiter founding member Wassily Kandinsky to the faculty and ended when Itten resigned in late Itten was replaced by the Hungarian designer László Moholy-Nagy, who rewrote the Vorkurs with a leaning towards the New Objectivity favored by Gropius, which was analogous in some ways to the applied arts side of the debate. Although this shift was an important one, it did not represent a radical break from the past so much as a small step in a broader, more gradual socio-economic movement that had been going on at least since 1907 when van de Velde had argued or a craft basis for design which Hermann Muthesius had begun implementing industrial prototypes.[14]
Students were to abolish all their preconceptions and open their creativity to new ideas. After a series of breathing and relaxation exercises, the problems of the day were often introduced through common drawing exercises. Itten devised explorations in light-dark contrasts, tone scales, color, material and texture, form, rhythm, nature studies, old master analyses, and so on, while at the same time considering the sensual, intellectual and spiritual meanings that might emerge. The basis of Itten’s teaching was his general theory of contrasts. Creating tension by comparing polar opposites, like light/dark or soft/hard, design problems were introduced in materials, textfures, forms, colors, rhythms, and so on.
By 1922, Itten was in charge of many workshops as well as the Vorkurs. Although there still was not much production at this time, his preference was toward expressive form over the functional requirements in the design of objects. This viewpoint, along with his fanatical mysticism (a combination of christian mysticism, zoroastroism, and eastern philosophy – check on specific references) was making itten a threat to the future direction of the Bauhaus and Gropius was finally able to force him out in But his contributions as a nurturing teacher had already been proven as a former student wrote, he was “singular in being able to free the creative abilities of his students, breaking down our inhibitions and taking a very active and personal part in guiding our development.” (in Lerner, quoting Adams, 1968,)
Note “spiritual” clothing

11. Bauhaus Vorkurs History: Johannes Itten 1919-1922
Itten was trained in teaching elementary students using Froebel’s methods—including the famous Froebel “gifts” (sets of blocks and other manipulables which also had a great impact on Frank Lloyd Wright’s and Buckminster Fuller’s development)
Itten had been a kindergarten teacher earlier in his career, trained in teaching methods and materials developed by Friedrich Froebel, who is best known as the inventor of the kindergarten concept. Itten’s Bauhaus Vorkurs had many similarities to Froebel’s pedagogy. For both Froebel and Itten, students learned by doing, experimentation for its own sake was encouraged, and “play” was considered key in imparting important theoretical discoveries. Even in the more advanced levels taught by teachers such as Klee, Kandinsky, and Albers, Froebel’s influence was evident—either because they had been kindergarten students themselves or because of their later teaching training. Froebel’s methods—including the famous Froebel “gifts” (sets of blocks and other manipulables) also had a great impact on Frank Lloyd Wright’s and Buckminster Fuller’s development—two of the giants of 20th century architecture and design.
Friedrich Froebel (1782 – 1852) was the inventor of the modern Kindergarten and Froebel “Gifts” including his famous Froebel Blocks.

12. Bauhaus Vorkurs History: László Moholy-Nagy 1923 - 1928
In 1923, Moholy-Nagy replaced Johannes Itten as the instructor of the foundation course at the Bauhaus.
This effectively marked the end of the school’s expressionistic leanings and moved it closer towards its original aims as a school of design and industrial integration.
He coined the term “the New Vision” for his belief that photography could create a whole new way of seeing the outside world that the human eye could not.
While studying at the Bauhaus, Moholy’s teaching in diverse media — including painting, sculpture, photography, photomontage and metal — had a profound influence on a number of his students..
In 1923, Moholy-Nagy replaced Johannes Itten as the instructor of the foundation course at the Bauhaus. This effectively marked the end of the school’s expressionistic leanings and moved it closer towards its original aims as a school of design and industrial integration. The Bauhaus became known for the versatility of its artists, and Moholy-Nagy was no exception. Throughout his career, he became proficient and innovative in the fields of photography, typography, sculpture, painting, printmaking, and industrial design. One of his main focuses was photography. He coined the term “the New Vision” for his belief that photography could create a whole new way of seeing the outside world that the human eye could not. His theory of art and teaching is summed up in the book The New Vision, from Material to Architecture. He experimented with the photographic process of exposing light sensitive paper with objects overlain on top of it, called photogram. While studying at the Bauhaus, Moholy’s teaching in diverse media — including painting, sculpture, photography, photomontage and metal — had a profound influence on a number of his students, including Marianne Brandt
Note “worker” clothing

13. Bauhaus Vorkurs History: Josef Albers 1928 - 1933
Before enrolling as a student at the Bauhaus in 1920, Josef had been a school teacher in his hometown of Bottrop, in the northwestern industrial Ruhr region of Germany
Once he was at the Bauhaus, he worked primarily in stained and sandblasted glass, first making glass assemblages from detritus he found at the Weimar town dump, then sandblasting glass constructions and designing large stained-glass windows for houses and buildings. He also designed furniture, household objects, and a typeface, and developed a keen eye as a photographer.
In 1925 he was the first Bauhaus student to be asked to join the faculty and become a "master" there. By 1933, when pressure from the Nazis forced the school to close, Josef Albers had become one of its best-known artists and teachers.
In 1923, Moholy-Nagy replaced Johannes Itten as the instructor of the foundation course at the Bauhaus. This effectively marked the end of the school’s expressionistic leanings and moved it closer towards its original aims as a school of design and industrial integration. The Bauhaus became known for the versatility of its artists, and Moholy-Nagy was no exception. Throughout his career, he became proficient and innovative in the fields of photography, typography, sculpture, painting, printmaking, and industrial design. One of his main focuses was photography. He coined the term “the New Vision” for his belief that photography could create a whole new way of seeing the outside world that the human eye could not. His theory of art and teaching is summed up in the book The New Vision, from Material to Architecture. He experimented with the photographic process of exposing light sensitive paper with objects overlain on top of it, called photogram. While studying at the Bauhaus, Moholy’s teaching in diverse media — including painting, sculpture, photography, photomontage and metal — had a profound influence on a number of his students, including Marianne Brandt
Note spats

14. “Modernist” Foundations (20th c.) “postHaus” Foundations (21st. C.)
Top down teaching model (“sage on the stage”)
Design solutions free of context
Passive acceptance of ideas
Static elements and principles
Drive towards simplicity, clarity of design
Western focus exclusively
Discipline centric
Subjective response sufficient
Unexamined “universal” meanings accepted without careful weighing of evidence
Single discipline
Skill based
One size fits all
Resolved, independent, fixed “codes”
One schedule fits all
Personal expression (only)
Individual intelligence
Uni-modal with single pathway for navigation
Emphasis on “singular point of view”
Single “right” answer
Analog. Continuous. Unique.
Broadcast. Professionally produced. TV.
Bottom up “participatory” ( “guide on the side”).
Context driven
Active questioning
Dynamic elements and principles
Formal and conceptual complexity.
Range of historical and cultural sources
Student and/or community centric
Subjective response + objective analysis
Scrutinized “local” meanings and judgments from weighing multiple pieces of evidence
Interdisciplinary in scope
Idea based
Custom tailored
Open-ended, dependent, open-source
Thin slicing of schedule for best fit (Kallish)
Empathy with other points of view
Collective intelligence - Socially engaged
Multi-modal with the ability to follow the flow
Emphasis on “negotiation” and “relationships”
Multiple contingent possibilities
Digital. Discrete. Commensurable.
Broadband. Co-created content. Wikis.

15. The irony of our “Bauhaus Foundations” is…
How many of us are ONLY echoing the “Elements and Principles” of Arthur Wesley Dow or Johannes Itten’s “theory of contrasts” and not the integrated curriculum and responsibility to the broader social context that the original Bauhaus espoused?
While many Bauhaus ideas were integrated into American popular culture, the reception of these ideas reduced “a complex and multifaceted phenomenon to a simple formula,” most often made visible in architecture. Bauhaus ideas in America mainly become associated with a well-known stylistic “look,” while the context, writing, and teaching of the master educators of the Vorkurs were largely buried by time.
--Fern Lerner, Foundations for Design Education: Continuing the Bauhaus Vorkurs Vision, Studies in Art Education, Spring 2005.
The irony of our “Bauhaus” Foundations is…
Too many of our University level First year programs are only looking at the “Elements and Principles” and not the social context that the original Bauhaus espoused.
While many Bauhaus ideas were integrated into American popular culture, the reception of these ideas reduced “a complex and multifaceted phenomenon to a simple formula.” most often made visible in architecture. Bauhaus ideas in America mainly become associated with a well-known stylistic “look,” while the context, writing, and teaching of the master educators of the Vorkurs were largely buried by time. (Lerner, Fern, Foundations for Design Education: Continuing the Bauhaus Vorkurs Vision, Studies in Art Education, Spring 2005, 46, 3.

16. What’s Your Teaching Philosophy?
John Dewey,
Elliot Eisner X X X
Lucy Lippard

17. What’s Your Teaching Philosophy?
Student Centered (Personal Growth / Self-Actualization)
Friedrich Froebel – Developed the modern Kindergarten and “Froebel Blocks.”
Maria Montessori - independence, freedom within limits, respect for child’s nature
Johannes Itten – Developed the first Vorkurs at the Bauhaus (1919 – 1922)
John Dewey – Child-centered learning
Jean Piaget – Stages of human development
Discipline Centered (Art for Art’s Sake)
Clement Greenberg – Modernist art critic
Lazlo Moholy Nagy – Led the Vorkurs from 1923 – 1928 at the Bauhaus
Mies Van Der Rohe – Director of the short-lived Berlin Bauhaus (1932 – 33)
Josef Albers – Led the Vorkus from
Society Centered (Socially Engaged Art – SEA)
Walter Gropius, Founding Director, Bauhaus (?)
Lucy Lippard – Environmental/Social Activist and Art Critic
Judy Baca – Muralist in So Cal. represented darker side of racial inequities
Tim Rollins – Kids of Survival
Pablo Helguera (Handbook: Education for Socially Engaged Art) X X X

18. Foundations for a 21st c. Curriculum
Art Educator, June King McFee wrote in 1978 of “the arts as reflectors and modifiers of a social change.” The kind of “multivariant problem-solving” she advocated would include: “the visual as well as the conceptual, the affective as well as the intellectual, the social as well as the physical, and the aesthetic as well as the economic. Monumental changes are needed in education to prepare students to think multivariantly in these dimensions…
McFee, J.K. (1978). Art abilities in environmental reform. Art Education, 31(4), 9 – 12.
A 21st century curriculum needs to be responsive to the dynamic and emergent conditions and requirements of its culture. The objective elements (line, shape, texture, value, etc) and principles (unity, emphasis, balance, rhythm, scale/proportion, etc.), while relevant to studio practice, provide little foundation in those skills and strategies (“markers for success”) that are essential in our shared and increasingly interconnected world. Rather than being static descriptors of formal relationships, a truly 21st century foundations trades in active signifiers and processes. Rather than “nouns,” a 21st century foundation cultivates “verbs.” Rather than providing recipes that effectively echo “modernist” standards and assumptions, a 21st century curriculum provides a useful framework regardless of media, circumstance, modality, or cultural context.

19. Foundations for a 21st c. Curriculum
A 21st century curriculum needs to be responsive to the dynamic and emergent conditions and requirements of its culture. The objective elements (line, shape, texture, value, etc) and principles (unity, emphasis, balance, rhythm, scale/proportion, etc.), while relevant to studio practice, provide little foundation in those skills and strategies (“markers for success”) that are essential in our shared and increasingly interconnected world. Rather than providing recipes that effectively echo “modernist” standards and assumptions, a 21st century curriculum should provide the critical and empathetic skills key to operating successfully in any media, circumstance, modality, or cultural context.
A 21st century curriculum needs to be responsive to the dynamic and emergent conditions and requirements of its culture. The objective elements (line, shape, texture, value, etc) and principles (unity, emphasis, balance, rhythm, scale/proportion, etc.), while relevant to studio practice, provide little foundation in those skills and strategies (“markers for success”) that are essential in our shared and increasingly interconnected world. Rather than being static descriptors of formal relationships, a truly 21st century foundations trades in active signifiers and processes. Rather than “nouns,” a 21st century foundation cultivates “verbs.” Rather than providing recipes that effectively echo “modernist” standards and assumptions, a 21st century curriculum provides a useful framework regardless of media, circumstance, modality, or cultural context.

20. Arizona State University Tempe, AZ 85287-2505 dan.collins@asu.edu
Dan Collins, MFA, PhD
artCORE Coordinator
School of Art
Arizona State University
Tempe, AZ
In the eighties there is a marked shift in the reception of photography that deghettoizes the practice from being a practice parallel to painting and sculpture to one that is today on parwith these expressions.
This change is grounded in conceptual art, where photography was used to document actions and ideas, and thus became part of the artist’s expression, rather than the photographer’s expression. In the works were about to look at we think today of these practitioners as artists who use photography rather than as photographers.
We will see that the conceptual thread wound in the seventies continues through all of these eighties works.
It is also important to consider that these artists we are about to look at have less interest in making photographic images, than in showing the construction and betraying our conventions for looking at those images.
These works become constructed pictures full of legible signs that the artists call to our attention.