교육의 내용과 방법으로서의 예술

Art as the Content and the Method of Education: Oakeshott on Art Education

In his “Work and Play”, Oakeshott divides all human activities into two distinct categories of ‘work’ and ‘play’. ‘Work’ in its wide sense stands for an activity of satisfying wants in the world, whereas ‘play’ in its wide sense an activity which, not directed to the satisfaction of wants, entails an attitude to the world which is not concerned to use it. To ‘play’ belongs two subcategories, which are ‘understanding and explaining the world’ and ‘the activity of poetic imagination’. Interestingly, the poetic imagination is said to be more securely insulated from any liability of being confused with ‘work’. “The Voice of Poetry in the Conversation of Mankind” is usefully referred to for exploring the nature of poetic imagination and its contribution to the conversation. The participants of the conversation are diverse voices such as the voice of practical activity, the voice of science, and the voice of poetry. Each voice is at once a manner of speaking and a determinate utterance. Nonetheless, when the latter is loosened from the former, the voice appears as a body of conclusion, losing its conversability. The voice of poetry is preeminently conversable in that its utterance cannot be detached from its manner of speaking or imagining. It is only with conversability of voices that they can appear in the genuine partnership in the conversation. For Oakeshott, education is an initiation into the skill and partnership of the conversation. And the voice of poetry plays a pivotal role in carrying on the conversation by inspiring other voices with their inherent conversability. The place that the voice of poetry takes in education for conversation can be considered in two aspects. Poetry is what should be taught in education. And it also refers to the poetic character of all human activity. Poetry can then be regarded as the method that should be complied with when the teacher and the learner engage with other voices.