Archives Scrapbooks

The image is a newspaper article titled "Arts Dept. Brushes Modernists Aside," written by Carla Hall and published in "The Independent" on November 25. The article discusses the controversy surrounding the lack of expertise in modern art within Harvard's Fine Arts Department following the departure of Michael Fried, a tenured faculty member.

Key points from the article include:

1. Departure of Michael Fried: The article notes that with Fried's departure, there is no tenured faculty expert in modern art at Harvard.

2. Challenges in Finding a Replacement: John Rosenfield, the department chairman, acknowledges the difficulty in finding a suitable replacement for Fried. He emphasizes the need for excellence and compatibility, comparing the search to finding a spouse.

3. Graduate Students' Concerns: Graduate students, particularly those specializing in modern art, are affected by the lack of expertise in this area. Susan Siegfried, a graduate student, highlights the difficulties in advising undergraduates and the uncertainty of faculty availability.

4. Department's Perspective: The department argues that modern art is covered in undergraduate courses and that graduate students can study modern art through independent research. Oleg Grabar, the department head, believes that the analytical techniques used in modern art can be applied to other fields.

5. Undergraduate Education: The article mentions that undergraduate education in modern art is not neglected, with courses and tutorials available. However, the structure of the department does not always reflect undergraduates' wishes.

6. Tenure System: The tenure system is discussed as a conservative mechanism that supports established faculty but can overlook younger scholars who might bring new expertise to the department.

7. Reasons for Fried's Departure: Several reasons are cited for Fried's departure, including the tenure system and the department's focus on more traditional areas of art history.

The article concludes by mentioning that the search for a new faculty member is ongoing and that the department is considering both internal and external candidates.

The Independent, Nov. '75

Fine Arts Dept. Brushes Modernists Aside

By CARLA HALL

"The field of modern art is inherently controversial. People will always disagree about who's good in it," John Rosenfield, chairman of Harvard's Fine Arts Department, explains. With the departure of former associate professor Michael Fried this fall, no tenured faculty expert in the area of modern art remains at Harvard. How to remedy this situation—and whether or not it should be remedied—presents a problem for the department. Since the field of modern art remains unsettled and unstable, Harvard shies away from sinking an irreversible tenure into modern art.

"Finding and recruiting a person for a tenured position is not like going to Woolworth's and looking," Rosenfield says. "We could get someone with no problem, but we pride ourselves on excellence and compatibility. The last thing we want to do is make a hasty decision."

However, he stresses that finding this excellent and compatible person is the department's first priority. "We're going to hammer and tongue on an appointment," he says. "We need a senior scholar, and we couldn't be looking for one harder. I don't think anyone is as aware of this problem as the faculty."

Scholars do not all agree on this question. Alixie Murphy, a former special student who did part time graduate work in fine arts at Harvard, argues that this matter goes beyond top priority. "I think Harvard is big enough to cover all the basic areas within academic fields and then specialize...Harvard has an obligation to cover nineteenth and twentieth century art."

Head tutor Oleg Grabar, however, disagrees that Harvard has any such obligation. "We can cover all fields. It is precisely because of Harvard's prestige that it should develop fields not developed elsewhere. It is Harvard's responsibility to keep up the very rare fields. This is not necessarily correct, but it is reasonable. Chicago and New York have far better collections of modern art, so why bother with it here, if it can be done elsewhere?"

For modernists, the Modern Grabar believes that the techniques of analysis taught in any history of art course should be applicable to other areas such as modern art. "You can take a course in Islamic art and learn what you need for the study of modern art—one doesn't have to have a course in modern art. Any work in one field gives you definitions and principles that can apply to any field. We would all agree that modern art has to be taught in undergraduate courses, no doubt. Whether we need it on the graduate level is much is questionable."

Grabar says Harvard will need someone new in that area next year whether tenured or not. Currently, nineteenth and twentieth century painting and sculpture courses are being taught either by lecturers with limited non-tenured appointments or by professors whose primary field is not modern art. However, in the department the majority of undergraduates will at one point express some degree of interest in studying modern art and a plurality of graduate students have declared their major field of interest as modern. This situation results in overcrowded modern art tutorials and a lack of advisors for graduate students writing theses and preparing for generals.

The department is certainly aware of these difficulties, but it does not necessarily feel obligated to make long term or even short term academic appointments particularly to alleviate the problems of undergraduates. "Tutorials have always been a problem in the modern field," Rosenfield notes. "If this were Williams or Wellesley, undergraduates' wishes would be reflected in the department, but at Harvard the structure of the department does not always coincide with the wishes of undergraduates. We have to balance the priority of undergraduate education with that of graduate education."

Nevertheless the lack of modernists also hurts graduate students. "There is always a graduate student to advise an undergraduate in modern art," says Sarene Shanas, a junior in Fine Arts, "but for a graduate student there's the problem of continuity regarding what member of the faculty you might study with. It's a very indefinite situation—if you hit a year when a person might be leaving, you don't know what to do the next year."

Graduate student Susan Siegfried confirms the problems that other graduate and undergraduate scholars have expressed, but stresses that the department is doing what it can. "I'm not happy with the situation," she said, "but I appreciate the problems and understand the difficulties involved in finding someone to tenure. If you make a list of who you want to come to Harvard, you have a list of old, established people or young and exciting people who have tenure somewhere else, so Harvard has to offer them tenure if it wants them to come here.

"Yet that person's reputation may not be established, so making the appointment of a young person is very tricky. Harvard is a very conservative institution and the tenure system supports this," she said.

Why Fried Fled

For several reasons, this system overlook Michael Fried, a likely tenure candidate who taught at Harvard until this fall. One of the reasons may be that he left Harvard too soon. "Most members of the department hated him," Susan Siegfried explained. "He was one of the best young members of the department, but he chose to leave before the tenure mechanism went into effect."

Fried left Harvard this fall to accept a tenured appointment at Johns Hopkins University. According to Rosenfield, the Fine Arts Department was at that time only considering recommending him for tenure to Bok.

The full-tenure procedure includes candidate scrutiny by an ad hoc committee chosen by President Bok.

(Continued on page 14)

The image is a page from a newspaper article titled "Fine Arts Dept. Brushes Modernists Aside," published in the November 75 issue of the "H. Independent." The article, authored by Carla Hall, discusses the challenges faced by Harvard's Fine Arts Department regarding modern art.

Key points from the article include:

1. Controversy in Modern Art Field: The field of modern art is inherently controversial, with disagreements about who is considered good in it.

2. John Rosenfield's Role: John Rosenfield, the chairman of Harvard’s Fine Arts Department, explains the department’s focus on recruiting and maintaining a balance between traditional and modern art education.

3. Finding Tenured Faculty: Finding a suitable and compatible person for a tenured position in modern art is challenging due to the lack of expertise within the department. Rosenfield mentions that they have had to consider non-tenured faculty, which causes issues.

4. Michael Fried’s Departure: Michael Fried, a former associate professor, left Harvard to avoid being sidelined in favor of modern art. He felt the department was moving away from its core mission.

5. Opinions on Modern Art: There is debate among faculty on whether to include modern art as a primary subject. Some believe it should be taught in undergraduate courses, while others argue it should be handled separately.

6. Student Perspective: Students express concern about the lack of modern art focus, with some feeling that the department is not adequately addressing their interests.

7. Undergraduate and Graduate Challenges: The article highlights the difficulty undergraduates face in finding tutors and advisors who can guide them effectively in modern art, leading to dissatisfaction among students.

8. Tutoring and Advising: The department's structure and the lack of modern art faculty result in a significant lack of tutoring and advising support for graduate students interested in modern art.

Overall, the article underscores the internal debates and practical difficulties within Harvard’s Fine Arts Department concerning the inclusion and teaching emphasis on modern art.

The image is a scanned newspaper article from November 1975, titled "Fine Arts Dept. Brushes Modernists Aside" by Carla Hall. The article discusses the challenges and controversies within Harvard's Fine Arts Department regarding the teaching of modern art.

Key points include:

• The department is facing a dilemma over whether to establish a tenured position for modern art, given the controversial nature of the field.
• John Rosenfield, chairman of the department, expresses concern over the lack of qualified candidates and the issue of overcrowded courses.
• The department's current courses in modern art are taught by non-tenured lecturers, which creates an unstable situation for students.
• Some faculty members, like Oleg Grabar, believe that Harvard should cover all fields without bias, while others, like Michael Fried, argue that modern art is not a priority.
• The article also mentions the departure of former associate professor Michael Fried, who left to accept a tenure-track position at Johns Hopkins University.
• Graduate and undergraduate students express frustration with the lack of modern art courses and the uncertainty of faculty continuity.

The article highlights the internal struggles and differing opinions within the department regarding the importance and future of modern art education at Harvard.

The image is a newspaper article titled "Fine Arts Dept. Brushes Modernists Aside" from the Harvard Independent, dated November 1975. The article, written by Carla Hall, discusses the challenges and controversies within Harvard's Fine Arts Department, particularly regarding the hiring of faculty specializing in modern art.

Key points from the article include:

1. Modern Art Controversy: The department's chairman, John Rosenfield, admits that finding a tenured expert in modern art is difficult and that Harvard has not prioritized this field, despite its importance.

2. Departmental Priorities: The article highlights the department's focus on traditional areas such as nineteenth and twentieth-century painting and sculpture, which are considered more established and less controversial.

3. Graduate and Undergraduate Concerns: Graduate students express frustration over the lack of modern art courses and the difficulty in securing tenure. Susan Siegfried and Sarene Shanus mention the problem of continuity in faculty appointments and the lack of opportunities for students to advise on modern art.

4. Oleg Grabar's Views: Oleg Grabar, head tutor, argues that Harvard should not prioritize modern art over other fields, stating that it is not the department's responsibility to cover all areas equally.

5. Michael Fried’s Departure: Michael Fried, a tenured professor, left Harvard due to the tenure system's issues and the department's failure to consider him for tenure. Fried's departure is noted as a significant event, contributing to the department's struggles.

6. Tenure System Criticisms: The article criticizes the tenure system for being overly cautious and conservative, making it difficult for younger professors to secure tenure.

The article provides a snapshot of the academic and administrative challenges faced by Harvard's Fine Arts Department in the mid-1970s, particularly in balancing traditional art education with the growing importance of modern art.

The image displays a newspaper article from "The Independent," specifically page 75, titled "Fine Arts Dept. Brushes Modernists Aside" by Carla Hall. The article discusses the controversial nature of modern art and the challenges faced by Harvard University’s Fine Arts Department regarding the study and teaching of this field.

Key points include:

1. Controversy in Modern Art: The field of modern art is highly controversial, with many people disagreeing on its merits. John Rosenfield, chairman of Harvard’s Fine Arts Department, acknowledges this issue.

2. Faculty Departure: Michael Fried, a tenured faculty member and expert in modern art, left Harvard, leading to concerns about the future of modern art studies at the institution.

3. Hiring Challenges: The department aims to find a replacement with both expertise and compatibility. They emphasize the importance of finding someone who excels in the field and fits well within the department’s culture.

4. Student Concerns: Graduate students, such as Alex Murphry and Susan Siegfried, express worries about the lack of modern art courses and the potential negative impact on their education and future academic careers. They highlight the need for continuity and proper advising for graduate students.

5. Administrative Perspective: Graduate tutor Oleg Grabar and department head John Rosenfield discuss the difficulty of covering all academic fields and the importance of balancing undergraduate and graduate education.

6. Historical Context: The article mentions that Michael Fried left to accept a tenured position at Johns Hopkins University. Harvard’s initial offer to Fried was a lectureship, which he declined due to tenure considerations.

7. Departmental Procedures: Harvard’s Fine Arts Department has a full tenure procedure that involves scrutiny by both internal and external committees.

Overall, the article highlights the complexities and tensions involved in maintaining a robust modern art curriculum at Harvard, balancing faculty expertise, student needs, and departmental resources.

This is an image of a newspaper article titled "Arts Dept. Brushes Modernists Aside" by Carla Hall. The article is from a publication named "Harvard Independent" dated November 1975, as indicated by the note "Nov '75" written in the margin in what appears to be handwriting. The text discusses opinions on modern art within the context of Harvard's Fine Arts department, mentioning individuals like John Rosenfield, who is critical of modern arts' controversial nature. A central theme of the debate in the article is the relevance and treatment of modern art in academia, particularly at institutions like Harvard. It mentions some of the grievances associated with the teaching and perception of modern art, including quotes from faculty and students on the subject. Other topics covered include curriculum choices, the impact on graduate students, the appointment of professors, and the tension between traditional and modern art within an academic setting. The continuation of the article can be found on page 14, according to the text at the bottom right of the image.

The article is overlaid on a lavender background, making it look like a clipping or a photocopy pasted onto a different sheet of paper. There are signs of folding or creasing on the paper, which could suggest that the article was previously folded.

The image is a scanned page from a newspaper or magazine, featuring an article titled "Arts Dept. Brushes Modernists Aside." The article discusses the challenges faced by the Arts Department at Harvard University, particularly in finding a tenured professor for modern art. The article includes quotes from various individuals, such as John Rosenfield, the chairman of the Fine Arts Department, and Michael Fried, a former faculty member who left the university. The article also mentions the difficulties in recruiting a suitable candidate for the tenured position, the overcrowded modern art tutorials, and the lack of advisors for graduate students. The article concludes with a discussion on the tenure system and its impact on the department's ability to attract and retain faculty members.

The image is a scanned page from a publication titled "The Arts Dept. Brushes Modernists Aside", authored by Carla Hall. The page is dated November 1975 and appears to be part of a newsletter or academic journal, as indicated by the header and structured layout. The content discusses the challenges faced by the Department of Art at Harvard University in the field of modern art, particularly focusing on the lack of modernists in the faculty and the implications for graduate students and the department's academic priorities.

Key Elements of the Image:

Header:

• The top of the page features a handwritten title: "The Arts Dept. Brushes Modernists Aside".
• Below the title, the author is identified as Carla Hall.
• The date is noted as November 1975.

Body Text:

The main body of the text is divided into several paragraphs, discussing various perspectives and issues related to the Harvard Art Department and its approach to modern art. Key points include:

1. Controversy in Modern Art:

   • The field of modern art is described as inherently controversial, with differing opinions on what constitutes modern art.
   • John Rosenfield, chairman of Harvard’s Fine Arts Department, is quoted discussing the challenges of remedying the lack of modern art expertise at Harvard.

2. Harvard’s Approach to Modern Art:

   • Michael Fried, a former associate professor and faculty expert in modern art, is mentioned as having left Harvard, leaving a gap in expertise.
   • The department is criticized for its lack of a modern art specialist, with the field described as "unsettled and sinking an irreversible shift away from modern art."

3. Recruiting for a Tenured Position:

   • The department is seeking a new faculty member, but the process is complicated by the need to find someone with expertise in modern art, particularly in the areas of nineteenth and twentieth-century art.
   • The challenge is emphasized: "Finding and recruiting a person for a tenured position is not like going to Woolworth’s and looking."

4. Opinions from Faculty and Students:

   • Michael Fried: Stresses the difficulty of finding a compatible person and the importance of prioritizing excellence and compatibility over haste.
   • John Rosenfield: Agrees that Harvard has an obligation to cover basic academic fields, including modern art, but notes the department’s conservative nature and the difficulty of recruiting modernists.
   • Oleg Grabar: Disagrees with Rosenfield, arguing that Harvard should develop fields not prestige but keep up with the very rare fields it has established. He believes the department should prioritize modern art.

5. Graduate Student Concerns:

   • Graduate students express frustration with the lack of modern art expertise, noting that the department does not offer courses in modern art at the graduate level.
   • The absence of modern art courses is seen as problematic for graduate students, who need guidance and mentorship in this area.
   • Susan Siegfried, a graduate student, highlights the stress caused by the lack of clear academic direction and the difficulty in finding advisors for modern art.

6. Impact on the Department:

   • The lack of modern art expertise is described as hurting graduate students and creating uncertainty about academic priorities.
   • The department is criticized for not aligning its undergraduate and graduate curricula, with undergraduate courses often focusing on non-modern art.

7. Fried’s Departure:

   • Michael Fried left Harvard to accept a tenured appointment at Johns Hopkins University. His departure is linked to dissatisfaction with the department’s handling of modern art and the tenure system at Harvard.

Visual Layout:

• The page is formatted with standard newspaper or journal typography, featuring justified text and clear paragraph breaks.
• The text is dense and academic in tone, with quotes from various individuals and detailed explanations of the issues at hand.
• The handwritten title at the top adds a personal or editorial touch, suggesting the page may be from a newsletter or internal publication rather than a formal academic journal.

Overall Context:

The page provides a detailed exploration of the challenges faced by Harvard’s Art Department in the mid-1970s, particularly regarding the representation and teaching of modern art. It highlights tensions between academic priorities, faculty expertise, and student needs, offering insights into the institutional dynamics of the time. The inclusion of quotes from faculty and students underscores the complexity of the issue and the diverse perspectives involved.

The image shows a page from a newspaper or magazine featuring an article titled "Arts Dept. Brushes Modernists Aside." The article discusses the challenges faced by the Fine Arts Department at Harvard University in recruiting and retaining faculty members specializing in modern art.

The article begins with a quote from John Rosenfield, the chairman of the Fine Arts Department, who acknowledges the controversy surrounding modern art and the difficulty in finding a suitable replacement for Michael Fried, a former associate professor who left the department. Rosenfield emphasizes the department's commitment to finding an excellent and compatible candidate but stresses the importance of making a hasty decision.

The article highlights the department's struggle to attract and retain modernist scholars, with only a few graduate students specializing in modern art and a lack of advisors for those preparing theses in the field. The department is aware of these challenges but feels obligated to make long-term or short-term academic appointments to cover all basic areas within academic fields and specialization.

The article also mentions the difficulties faced by graduate students in modern art, who may struggle to find faculty members with expertise in their area of study. The department's reputation as a conservative institution and its tenure system, which requires a full-tenure procedure, are cited as potential reasons for the challenges in recruiting modernist scholars.

Overall, the article paints a picture of a department grappling with the complexities of modern art and the challenges of maintaining a diverse and comprehensive faculty in the face of changing artistic trends and academic priorities.