This is the second article I’ve read this week about Yale student Aliza Svhart’s senior project, er, performance. Reportedly, she artificially inseminated herself using voluntary donors while ovulating, and would later induce a miscarriage using an herbal method. The result of this performance will be a hanging installation making use of cellophane and video of the miscarriages.

The aforementioned Wall Street Journal article says it well, “Immaturity, self-importance and a certain confused earnestness will always loom large in student art work. But they will usually grow out of it. What of the schools that teach them?” The thrust of the Journal’s article seems to revolve around the educational aspect of art colleges. It suggests that most programs will begin by running students through basic drawing courses before channeling them into emphasis such sculpture or printmaking. Courses should, writer Michael J. Lewis contends, become increasingly challenging. This was my own experience, and also that of my brother who is a painter. I can’t imagine any reputable program diverging much from such a model without very good reason.

Another important point offered by Lewis notes the importance of two professorial archetypes key to the education of an artist: “It is often said that great achievement requires in one’s formative years two teachers: a stern taskmaster who teaches the rules and an inspirational guru who teaches one to break the rules. But they must come in that order.” I don’t think many aspiring artists realize the importance of rules, which are key to respectable craft and discipline. The young painter or sculptor’s ideas often outpace their ability to actually create a successful work of art. Further, the romantic notions surrounding working as a successful artist aren’t normally realistic. Professional artists need discipline, organization and so on.

Aliza Shvarts. Disarticulation. 12 in. x 12 in. x 24 in. Plaster, vaseline, towels, rubber bands, latex gloves. Photo from the Yale website.