Its an interesting idea, but one which which reveals a lack of understanding of the film industry and a denial of the current state of the University of Lapland media faculty.
Simply employing a Professor for Film does not make a course in filmmaking. Filmmaking requires a massive investment in technology and teaching. One tutor is not enough. You need education in scriptwriting, lighting, cinematography, set design. And how about acting, production management, editing, effects. The list is as long as the credits of a movie.
It would no doubt be said that some of these things already exist at the university, but to be quite frank, the level of competence is very low. In order to provide a competitive education you need qualified educators. And unfortunately in the University of Lapland media faculty there are very few qualified teachers. Many have no formal qualifications and little work experience. Often jobs are dealt to favourite students, nepotism is rife.
This situation can lead to only one thing - a decline in the already low standards of education available.
The problem with the media faculty is that it only provides technical education of a level that appears to be competing with polytechnics, not universities. Universities by nature are supposed to include at least some level of academic education, and in the media faculty this is sadly lacking.
In the media faculty of the University of Lapland, theory is often misunderstood as technical knowledge. Don't get me wrong, technical knowledge is vital, but it should go hand in hand with theoretical and conceptual education of an academic nature. Why? Because one informs the other, and through that produces art. Without that all that is produced - and this is typical of what is produced at the faculty - is technical demos.
Too often I hear comments that academic courses are not offered because 'students don't like them'.
This is madness! A university is not there to offer only what students 'like'. If it were universities would offer free beer and condoms and then hand you an MA. The last thing we should hear from a lecturer at a university is an apology after the lecture along the lines of "I hope that this lecture was not too academic"! It's a university! It's supposed to be academic!
Students should attend university to gain a quality education then encompasses both technical expertise and critical theory. This is where the arts universities in Finland go wrong, and it partially explains the notorious lack of real criticism and anything challenging in the Finnish arts.
Part of the problem is the targeting of the media faculty and its perceived position in relation to the rest of the arts universities in FInland. The media faculty, and to some extent the arts faculty in general, should not be trying to compete with the University of Industrial Arts. There are so few institutions offering 'academic' level arts education in Finland that there is only the need for one such institution, and UIAH/TAIK has it nailed. Why compete with that when instead the faculty could try to offer something unique in Finland - an arts faculty in a University with a strong grounding in academic theory.
I would love to see something like this happen. It would put Rovaniemi and the University of Lapland on the international art map. It would be great to see graduates from Lapland included in the Venice Biennial representatives from Finland. By combining technical knowledge with strong art theory would place the University of Lapland in competition more with the Helsinki Arts Academy. This is where we should be aiming.
To not address this issue means that the perception of the arts in Lapland from other areas will continue to be unprofessional and incompetent. I know these are strong words, but I as an artist myself have encountered this attitude on numerous occasions from curators and arts practitioners in important positions in the south. It is very irritating, and it is something that needs to be challenged, and challenged now.
One way to do this is to immediately stop the promotion and employment of friends and favourite students. It's tempting to reward students that lecturers are fond of, but it does the reputation of the institution no good.
Another important issue to address is blind promotion. A recent exhibition of a Ph.D. graduation show was one of the most appalling examples of academic artistic work and presentation I have ever seen. To highlight this work as a fine example of the type of work produced at the University was a mistake. It showcased the lack of theoretical education at this institution, and an apparent lack of knowledge of faculty staff of the current international art scene and quality of art being produced at Ph.D. level. it was an embarrassment.
I've also recently discovered that, no matter how bad your Media Faculty-awarded MA might be, you can easily continue to do a Ph.D.! The policy appears to be something along the lines of 'we take anyone'. Are the administrative staff unaware of the damage this does to the reputation of the university? All those stupid comments I've had to put up with about unprofessionally in Lapland are only reinforced by policies such as this. Imagine the discredit and disservice this does to genuine Ph.D. researchers - the people who really care about what they are doing. How do they feel when they have worked hard to get where they are only to find that anyone can get a Ph.D. at the University of Lapland.
For too long the Arts Faculty has spent its money on technology only to find that it has no money left for teaching. We need more visiting lecturers. More visiting artists. For example, it is hard to believe that in the media faculty there are no practicing or respected artists employed in teaching positions. We need more stringent acceptance policies. We need to engage with academia and not shy away from it. We need to push students hard so that they create excellent, not mediocre work. Mediocrity should be unacceptable.
Technorati Tags: art, education, university of lapland
