Artists: The Neglected Patrons?

Abstract

The historical study of the arts was established early in the higher educational system in the United States. Productions and performances were considered extracurricular activities. Separate art schools and conservatories specialized in these areas. During the Great Depression, many of these schools closed. Some merged with established universities, creating new curriculum areas in the arts beyond history and theory. These additions were often controversial; many traditional academicians (including some within the arts) viewed this as inappropriate academic study. In the 1940s and 50s, the arts gradually gained acceptance as equal members of the university community. Music performance and composition became accepted alongside the traditional areas of music history and theory. Programs in the visual arts became more common. Theatre and dance were the slowest to gain wide acceptance and yet today are rapidly growing in the university setting. (Risenhoover and Blackburn 1976, 3–11.) When artists joined the academic world, was there any effort made to determine their informational needs? The teaching methods, tenure requirements, and the working environment for artists are completely different from those of researchers and historians. How can it be assumed that library needs are the same? What do artists need from libraries?

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 10 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.