Talk:School of the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Universities, an attempt to standardise coverage of Universities and colleges. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this notice, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

	This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Boston; If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

I removed this statement:

The review boards and faculty strongly discourage students with lengthy art processes and lyrical evocations of antiquity, to the point of outright harassment. (see talk page)

It's a bit too POV and need a reference if true. --Etacar11 22:02, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

fine, but no reference can be furnished since it is the actual experience of not only myself but another student. your version creates the false impression that the school is egalitarian, and this is because it must come from advertising, and not from anyone who has actually been involved with this institution. Not only are the above statements completely demonstratible, if you don't believe me, try and prove it, i guarantee the results of your experiment. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.60.210.31 (talk • contribs).

• I'm sorry for your bad personal experiences with the school. I'm not calling you a liar by any means. But the fact remains that a wiki article is not the place to air personal grievances. See WP:NPOV. If you feel the article is biased in favor of the school, you are free to try to correct that, provided that the result is balanced. --Etacar11 22:21, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

"Balanced" is not necessarily the objective as long as the material is properly sourced. Verifiability is what insures neutrality. Find a source for this (like an article criticizing the school and/or its review methodology) and it would be appropriate for the article. -- Malber (talk • contribs) 22:51, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] misleading/second hand info

the statement that a review board is about a student's work is actually incorrect. the student's work is only a means by which the SMFA student communicates to the faculty their artistic personality. their artistic personality is really what the discussion is about, whether or not anyone who hasn't been there understands this. that information is probably from material originating from the school administration and is in contradiction with the actual practices of faculty there.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.60.210.31 (talk • contribs).

[edit] ps

furthermore, in cases such as this, you are no doubt using information that has a point of view. are you only going to allow information from written sources, because, in fact reviewing your work is supposed to be what the faculty does, but, it doesn't do what it's supposed to do. are you going to construct an encyclopedia in cases like these which make what they say they do a factual report? what is the means by which you determine point of view opinions and when is it valid to be on the encyclopedia page? is it valid just because the school prints material describing itself one way? is it valid, in a similar way, to repeat president george w. bush's claim that we invaded Iraq for what he calls "peace"? in your article about the invasion. or, more exactly, how do you know how to divorce intent from information? In the case of SMFA, there is information that is lacking and the information presented is from a source likely to have a self-descriptive and even promotional intent. I contend the article is also a point of view that's been taken out of its original context, the one you've chosen to accept, and is not in fact a representative of reality.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.60.210.31 (talk • contribs).

i'm not sure if there could be verifiability as you put it on this subject. woul I have to write a book about my experiences to have it verifiable. If so, that doesn't seem like it's adequate to me. why would you think that my own word is different from a book i write? just because that means its public to attack etc. How about my roommate writes a report about me, and I about him. this world can be a sad sad place. where there should be joy, I see confusion and self-generated demons.

It's always important to tell the wikitruth. —Malber (talk • contribs) 19:40, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

well, if the information from what are literally self published sources or self-provided sources is used in the article, how is this not also a case of pov?

[edit] smfa in general

the museum school somehow boasts a "knit" community of artists, yet it is based on the mutual praise of ideas that have become enshrined as what is the art of the educated in modern art and the art of the formulaic ideas that have replaced questioning and searching. when i was there and searching for an innocence or a freedom that i couldn't find in the modern art school the faculty called my work everything from mistakes to hurting myself, that i had rigid execution and drawing, and all of this was intended to inform me that my work wasn't wanted. continually i was malinformed that i was avoiding the curriculum of the school, that i was using the school inappropriately until finally i left. i've decided that it was only important for me to be there until i realized that i really didn't have a reason to be there. but i really feel resentment about how pesonal and how aggressively they seemed to dislike the fact that i wasn't there and making something that they were just in love with, and i usually had very little feeling for what they embraced which seemed like everything except for what i was searching for. i feel like they tried to distract me from my chosen search. it is true i continued to be a student largely for other reasons for a few semesters. they also tried to make me accept their philosophy and interpretation of my artwork, and this also i've got a lot of resentment for. in fact i think i probably think that the aggression of their interpretation makes me more angry. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.177.180.28 (talk) 23:36, 1 March 2007 (UTC).