With respect for all those involved, let me state my view of the decision to abolish the School of Fine Arts at the University of Kansas. That decision can best be described as historically catastrophic.

There are two kinds of individuals involved in the arts; those who enjoy art and those who create art. Both are essential, for great art without an audience is irrelevant, and an enthusiastic audience without great art is a shame.

The mission of the School of Fine Arts as I understand it is to take individuals with raw talent and through a robust and progressive four-year program of study and practice, convert them into professional performing or visual artists. For decades now, the School of Fine Arts has been doing just that.

Art and music prodigies often go undiscovered through elementary and high school because the focus there is on math, language and science, and the tests that measure student ability are more quantitative than qualitative. The School of Fine Arts has always been the place in Kansas where the high school student with a high visual I.Q. or an innate musical gift can not only discover the full range of their talent but can hone that talent into a career in the arts. The close proximity of the various related fields under one academic roof gives the arts student the unique ability to explore each and choose a career path that best suits their talent and special interests.

The plan to reorganize the arts at Kansas by sending graphic design and visual communications to the School of Architecture and sending art (including painting, sculpture, ceramics, metalsmithing, installation art, fiber design) along with dance to the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences leaving only music in what is to become the School of Music may make the arts seem more accessible to students in some other disciplines, but it is counterproductive to the mission of turning out professional artists.

In the real world, the visual and performing arts are inseparable. Think about separating the two in your favorite film, television drama, theater production, or TV commercial. And can anyone please explain the logic of separating dance and music? The buzzword in today’s business world is: “discipline neutral integration.” Art and music students need to understand this before graduation if they are hoping for a career in the arts.

For the better part of a century, the School of Fine Arts has been turning out a quality product that has delighted audiences and served the public well. The shareholders, Kansas taxpayers, have received a very good return on investment and everyone associated with the university can be proud of the school’s history of achievement.

No one who cares about KU should be ambivalent about this issue. KU should continue to be known as a place that not only appreciates fine art, but also knows how to turn out fine artists.

My hope is that this decision is not irrevocable for the reasons that I have stated, and because the process by which this decision was made was seriously flawed. It was flawed because the School of Fine Arts had no leader in place to defend it when the deans of the College of Liberal Arts and the School of Architecture were allowed to cherry-pick key components from SFA to enhance their offerings. The previous dean, Steve Hedden, who now is a professor of music education at KU, had been replaced by an interim dean from the College of Liberal Arts

The process was flawed because a committee of mostly fine arts faculty was asked to recommend several models for reorganization after the same committee, acting as a search committee, failed to agree on a suitable recommendation for Hedden’s replacement. That kind of responsibility should not have been the reward for failure.

It’s a bad idea to ask a group of subordinates to hire their boss (something that only happens in academia) because they will put their career interest ahead of the long term goals of the institution. Committees are seldom held accountable and they are incapable of exercising intuition, something that is important in hiring. If the provost wanted a dean to lead the School of Fine Arts, he should have done the hiring himself.

Money may have been part of the argument in support of the reorganization when it went to the Kansas Board of Regents for approval. The Fine Arts Advisory Board, loaded with supporters of influence and means, was not asked to weigh in if it became apparent that funding was going to be a problem. The fact that the advice of the advisory board was not sought early on is another serious flaw in the process.

It seems that the arts always get hammered during tough economic times. I’m sure the economy will recover but I’m not as optimistic about fine arts education at KU.