In a world brimming with visual stimuli, the notion of "engaging with art" can often feel abstract or even intimidating. Through education, though, we can learn that art is not confined to aesthetics but extends to the mechanics of creation. When we think about the processes we use to read a poem, write an essay or synthesize intellectually about history, the mechanics of creating these works, or acts is uncannily similar to what artists do when outlining, constructing and creating their works. In engaging with art, we engage with ourselves and the world around us—a transformative process that is both deeply personal and profoundly universal. In a conversation with Laurel Jones, a second year at UNC-Chapel Hill studying English and Political Science, we learn that art holds multiplicities. Jones is not an art creator, but she has a knack for looking at visual art intellectually, specifically cinema and film, while also looking at physical art as a hobby. She clearly articulates that engaging with art goes beyond passive observation—it requires curiosity, an openness to process, and a willingness to participate in the broader conversation it sparks. In drafting blueprints, critiquing films, or shaping pottery, her story illuminates how art transcends its form to become a means of expression, connection, and understanding.
Her pedagogical experiences at UNC have included experimenting with art, writing about it, watching it, and even practicing arts criticism through writing at the Ackland Art Museum, which houses our exhibit. Looking at art, sitting with it and simply writing an academic essay is an act of criticism and creating, as the writer is synthesizing their own thoughts and reflections about what the piece instills in them. Laurel’s articulation around the high-brow and low-brow distinctions are incredibly pertinent to discussions around elitism and superiority in the art world. Art spaces, such as museums, carry a legacy of exclusivity, yet programs aimed at inclusion, like our educational guide, are looking to defeat structural barriers—rooted in historical practices of exclusion. For broader change, the art world and academia must embrace systemic shifts: reducing cost barriers, integrating more inclusive narratives, and fostering environments where experiential learning and community dialogue are prioritized. Her critique is clear and shared by many others: the academic and art worlds must strive to be less insular and more democratized. Through Laurel’s experience as a student and an art creator outside of her academics, she engages with art in a high capacity. Chris Musina, a professor in the art department at UNC, particularly his emphasis on exposure and meeting students where they are, can serve as a model for museum education strategies. He tells of his journey from art student to art educator, which mirrors Jones at times. The two share experiences of enjoying viewing and engaging with art and creating it as civilians, and as intellectuals. Musina creates work and also teaches about it, he said that at times some of the non-art majors are the best art creators, viewers and critics.
The two have two very different academic and professional backgrounds, but they are both invested in the spread and accessibility of art. The works in our exhibit also seek to push boundaries, and find subtle ways to deepen public engagement. Even though our two sources exist in the sphere of academia, they mirror the deconstructions of rigidity in the art world that we want to share with teachers, educators and community members based. We want to focus on growth rather than prior skill, something that we believe could inspire how museums structure community workshops.
Engaging with art is a multifaceted endeavor, one that transcends traditional boundaries of academia, creation, and critique. The stories of Musina and Jones, as well as other citizen artists and art critics inside and outside of museum spaces reveal how art can be a powerful tool for personal expression, intellectual growth, and societal transformation. We are reminded that art is not confined to museums or studios but lives— in the connections we form with ourselves, others, and the world. To truly democratize art and its education, the art world must continue to embrace diverse voices, expand access, and foster spaces where creativity is both personal and universal.
This group, myself included, found these strategies and the differences in artistic experiences between Musina, Jones and ourselves to shine a light on the vague notion of access. I have never considered myself an art creator, but I have written creatively and done arts criticism both personally and in academic settings. I identified with both of their experiences finding their personal interests with art, especially when Jones talked about finding film as an academic interest from a literary background. This made us realize that finding something to provoke interest in art is the gateway into community engagement in art spaces. The more access, space and care that museums can give to viewers of art will ultimately break down barriers of intellectualism and lead groups and individuals to hold art as a radical tool of reflection.
Comments