National Art Education Association

Using Interpretation Theory in Art Education Research

Author(s): Cathy A. Brooks
Source: Studies in Art Education, Vol. 24, No. 1 (1982), pp. 43-47
Published by: National Art Education Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1319802
Accessed: 14-04-2016 22:46 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

National Art Education Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Studies in Art Education

This content downloaded from 202.43.95.117 on Thu, 14 Apr 2016 22:46:42 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
STUDIES IN ART EDUCATION 24/1/1982

Using interpretation theory in art education research1

Cathy A. Brooks

One of the interpretive approaches currently finding favor in social science research is that of
the contemporary German philosopher, Hans-Georg Gadamer. For Gadamer, the interpretation
of a text is existentially grounded in the ontological significance of understanding that is
historical, dialectical, and linguistic. The author's use of hermeneutics in an inquiry illustrates
the essential aspects of Gadamer's theory, and indicates one of many possibilities that it offers
for art education research.

In art education, as in other fields allied to
the social sciences, there is a growing interest
in interpretive approaches to inquiry. This
presentation summarizes one of the theories
that is helpful in such inquiry, namely, Hans-
Georg Gadamer's dialectical hermeneutics,
describes some art education research in
which dialectical hermeneutics has been used,
and offers some suggestions for other inter-
pretive inquiries.
Gadamer offers a philosophical-critical-
historical theory of interpretation. This
excerpt from one of his recent essays provides
a fitting introduction to the discussion.
Having an historical sense is to conquer in a
consistent manner the natural naivete which
makes us judge the past by the so-called
obvious scales of our current life, in the
perspective of our institutions, and from our
acquired values and truths. Having an his-
torical sense signifies thinking explicitly about
the historical horizon which is coextensive
with the life we live and have lived . . . This
reflexive posture towards traditions is called
interpretation. And if something is able to
characterize the truly universal dimension of
this event it is surely the role that the word
interpretation has begun to play in the
modern sciences . . . Interpretation, as we
understand it today, is applied not only to
texts and verbal tradition, but to everything
bequeathed to us by history; thus, for
example, we will speak not only of the inter-
pretation of an historical incident, but also
the interpretation of behavior, and so forth.
We always intend by this that the meaning of
what is given over for our interpretation is not
revealed without mediation, and that we
must look beyond the immediate sense in
order to discover the "true" hidden meaning
(Gadamer, 1979, pp. 110-111).
The Historical Background
of the Discipline of Hermeneutics
Modern hermeneutics is comprised of two
distinct and interacting foci: one is concerned
with the event of interpretation of a text, and
the other is concerned with the more en-
compassing questioning of the nature of
understanding itself (Palmer, 1969, p. 8). In
its Greek roots the word hermeneutic refers
to the messenger-god Hermes, whose
function was one of mediation, of explaining
so that mortals might come to understand
(p. 13). For centuries hermeneutics' tradi-
tional focus has been based upon the inter-
pretive task, especially as it pertains to
biblical and literary texts. To many con-
temporary thinkers in the field hermeneutics
is the deciphering process by which one
understands a work, that which carries the
imprint of human meaning (p. 7). In current
usage, a text is broadly defined as anything
that has a manifest content and a latent or
hidden meaning: literary texts, historical
events and situations, dreams, cultural
symbols, and memories of past experience
(p. 43).
In this century the focus of hermeneutics
has been expanded to include philosophical
inquiry into the nature of understanding
itself. This branch of the field stems from the
landmark writings of the existential philoso-
pher Martin Heidegger. The essential theme
of Heidegger's philosophical writings is the
disclosure of Being, or Dasein. In Being and
Time (1962) Heidegger rejects the conception
of knowledge based upon a subject-object
dualism. Instead, Heidegger poses an exis-
tential conception of knowledge that is
fundamentally historical and ontological. For
Heidegger all understanding is temporal,
intentional, and historical (Palmer, 1969, p.
140). Understanding is an event in which one
participates; it comes about in phenomeno-
logical inquiry into one's own existence in
the everyday world, and is the disclosure of
Dasein. Within this existential conception of
understanding, Heidegger shows hermeneutics
to be a fundamental human event that dis-

This content downloaded from 202.43.95.117 on Thu, 14 Apr 2016 22:46:42 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
44
closes the nature of being. This discovery of
the ontological significance of understanding,
conceived as the historical event of interpre-
tation, paved the way for fully philosophical
concerns within the field of hermeneutics (p.
42).
Following this lead, the German philoso-
pher Hans-Georg Gadamer has developed
Heidegger's hermeneutical phenomenology
into a systematic philosophical hermeneutics.
In his book Truth and Method (1975)
Gadamer takes Heidegger's conception of
understanding further by questioning the
relationship of language to being, under-
standing, history, existence, and reality.
Gadamer's purpose is not methodological;
rather, his focus is upon understanding the
ontological process in man, and in establish-
ing one's encounter with being through
language as the foundation of the human
sciences. "The work of hermeneutics is not
to develop a procedure of understanding, but
to clarify the conditions in which under-
standing takes place" (p. 263).
Gadamer's Theory
of Dialectical Hermeneutics
For Gadamer understanding generally,
and hermeneutical experience especially, is
always an historical, dialectical, and linguistic
event. The interpretation of a text is grounded
in the nature of understanding as ontolog-
ically significant.
Historical Understanding
As historical beings, our understanding of
a text is possible because of our situation
within a tradition. In an event of understand-
ing we bring into play an established way of
seeing, certain ideological preconceptions,
and a preliminary intention, all bequeathed
to us from the tradition. This is what consti-
tutes the historical reality of one's being: "in
fact, history does not belong to us, but we
belong to it" (Gadamer, 1975, p. 245).
The present is the given in which the event
of understanding is rooted. The meaning
that the text has is defined by the questions
put to it from the present, questions that are
ordered by our situation in a particular
moment in history (p. 238). This temporal
structure of understanding is also ordered by
the way being projects itself into the future.
The intentionality of our questions to the
text., and the meaning of the text for us in the
present, are a way of projecting ourselves in
understanding into the future.
This content downloaded from 202.43.95.117 on Thu, 14 Apr 2016 22:46:42 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
STUDIES IN ART EDUCATION 24/1
Understanding is an historically funded
and operative structure based in universal
past-present-future temporality. Our under-
standing of a text is of the past, in that we
understand in and through what a tradition
has bequeathed to us; it is of the present, in
that our questions to the text are ordered by
our situation in the present moment of that
tradition; it is of the future in that we project
ourselves futureward in the very act of
understanding.
Dialectical Understanding
The historicality of understanding places
both the interpreter and the text in the stream
of history. Reflecting the historicality of be-
ing, the interpreter brings to the event of
interpretation present understanding, or
horizon, in and through which he or she
encounters the text. The text is an other with
its own horizon, standing with the interpreter
in the stream of history. The process of inter-
action between the horizons of the interpreter
and the text is like a dialogue between per-
sons. It is experience structured in question
and answer.
The inauguration of dialectical experience
is grounded in the interpreter's encounter of
negativity; that is, in the realization that
some matter is not as one first thought.
Present understanding in some way breaks
down: negativity is the knowledge of not
knowing. This, says Gadamer, is the ground-
ing of true questioning, which presupposes
that the answer is unknown and, at the same
time, that the questioning is posed within the
specific boundaries of the interpreter's
horizon. In the dialectic of question and
answer the posture of the interpreter must be
one of questioning responsiveness, an attitude
of openness and expectancy to what the text
has to say. The dialectical experience consists
in the interpreter's posing a question to the
text, and in turn, being questioned by it.
The goal of the dialectic is a fusion of
horizons. In its questioning of the interpreter,
the text lights up the interpreter's horizon,
making self-understanding of that horizon
possible. In coming to understand the
meaning of the text, the interpreter's horizon
is not abandoned; rather, it expands to
include that of the text. Moreover, the
interpreter comes to understand not only the
meaning of the horizons, but also to recog-
nize the fundamental historicality of the
horizons, of their belonging to a tradition.
Thus, the fusion of horizons becomes a

Using interpretation theory in art education research
moment of ontological disclosure, a dis-
closure of the nature of one's being.
Understanding occurs in the dialectical
experience of the interpreter's encounter
with the text. Through the movement of
question and answer the interpreter
experiences the disclosure of the meaning of
the text as a relative other, as well as the
meaning of his or her own horizon and the
stream of tradition in which the horizons
mutually exist.
Linguistic Understanding
The medium in and through which this
disclosure can take place is language. We do
not first have extralinguistic contact with the
world and then put this world into the instru-
mentation of language; language is not a tool
that we bring into use. Rather than our pos-
session of language, it is our possession by
language which is the condition of our exper-
ience and thus of understanding (Linge,
1976, p. xxix). As we belong to tradition, so
we belong to language.
The belonging of interpreter and text to
language is significant to hermeneutical
experience, for it makes the fusion of
horizons possible. The interpreter enters into
a dialogue with the text, bringing a heritage
of assumptions hidden in the language
through which the text is questioned. The
text also carries a heritage hidden in the
language that constitutes it. In its life in
dialectical experience, language is the
common medium that enables the disclosure
of being and the fusion of these two horizons.
In keeping with its lived nature, language it-
self also moves and changes, transformed in
the very act of disclosure (Gadamer, 1975).
Knowledge as Historical Consciousness
Knowledge as it comes about through the
dialectical experience is the threefold under-
standing of the text's horizon, the interpreter's
horizon, and the tradition in which both
stand. Knowledge is the wisdom that comes
through experience which discloses the
historical, dialectical, and linguistic nature
of being. Gadamer calls this knowledge
historical consciousness.2 It is characterized
as one's experiential openness to the past
and to the future; its essence is in one's
critical understanding of belonging to tradi-
tion and in one's increased openness to
questioning. It is knowledge seen not as
objectified information about an object, but
rather as nonobjectifiable consciousness that
This content downloaded from 202.43.95.117 on Thu, 14 Apr 2016 22:46:42 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
45
makes one open to the past as it operates in
the present and to speculation about the
future (pp. 304-305). In existential terms,
historical consciousness is one's experience
of the authentic movement of being.
Hermeneutics and Art Education Research
Probably the best known and best docu-
mented art education research incorporating
Gadamer's theory is Beittel's (1973) research
into the lived experience of artists making
series of drawings. But the focus upon mak-
ing art is only one area of inquiry for which
dialectical hermeneutics can be fruitful.
Wilson (1974) proposed in-cultural evaluation
of art schooling, that is, assessing what
happens in art classrooms from an out-of-
school, culturally-situated point of view.
Traditional educational assessment remains
within the institutional structure, often leav-
ing underlying assumptions unquestioned.
This myopia contributes to a lack of perspec-
tive regarding the relationships between art
schooling and the broader context of cultural
art education. Wilson suggests strategies for
indicating aspects of these relationships,
including articulation of aesthetic systems
other than those of high art, the study of
individuals' lifestyles for indications of the
long-term consequences of art schooling,
and the search for unexpected outcomes of
art schooling.
As an example of the interpretive approach
I will briefly describe my hermeneutic inquiry
into some aspects of art education (Brooks,
1980). In the course of my professional train-
ing I had appropriated many of the theo-
retical assumptions that influence the art
educator's enterprise. Confronted with a
plethora of explanations served up to per-
suade us about everything from the nature of
art and aesthetic experience to the nature of
human beings and how they learn, I found
myself increasingly aware that some of those
explanations did not ring true for my own
childhood art experience. Why did those
generalizations not account for my own life?
Out of this confrontation with negativity, I
decided to search my childhood art experi-
ences for their significance so I could better
understand art education's functions and my
purpose in being a teacher and researcher.
The text that I interpreted was composed
of over 400 collected artifacts of my child-
hood art activities, and the memories of
associated experiences that I described
phenomenologically in a memory journal.
46
This text presented the horizon of my child-
hood identity and world, that is, myself as a
child interested in making things, as a
daughter, and as a public school student
living in a 1950s world of visual and verbal
discourse in a middle-class family, an
industrial town, and its public schools. As
interpreter I brought to the inquiry my
horizon of adult identity and world, that is,
myself as trained artist and art educator in
the 1970s world of visual and verbal discourse
about fine art and education, at work in a
university community of academics and pro-
fessionals.
The ensuing dialectic between these two
horizons produced an interpretation of the
text that disclosed a distinction between
school art and home art based on their
differing intentions for constituting my
individual identity. School intentions for my
identity were modeled on the convention of
an ideal average American: a reflection of
the national myth and ethos, homogeneous
and a good worker. The making of images
and objects in school was characterized by
abundant depictions of emblems of the
national myths, activity structured by
scheduled time and assignments, and pro-
duction that used a limited range of specified
materials. At home, intentions for identity
focused on the conventions needed to
actualize upward movement in the society's
class hierarchy, on models of prosperous
mainstream American culture, and on distin-
guishing oneself from the average. Making
activity was determined by desire and
interest in something, and in establishing a
sense of being different. Play was a practice
ground for learning the conventions that
determined my social identity and making
things was an integral part of my play.
As the text began to disclose these mean-
ings, it prompted me to rethink many of the
theoretical generalizations of conventional
art education practice, and to critically re-
evaluate the role of teacher in relating to the
dialectical tension between the ideological
intentions of schooling and the individual
Cathy A. Brooks is a researcher in art education living in Tolono, Illinois.
References
Beittel, K. R. Alternatives in art education research: Inquiry into the making of art. Dubuque, Iowa:
William C. Brown, 1973.
This content downloaded from 202.43.95.117 on Thu, 14 Apr 2016 22:46:42 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
STUDIES IN ART EDUCATION 24/1
intentions of the student. In terms of
Gadamer's theory, this point in the inquiry
marked the fusion of horizons, where the
interpreter's horizon is changed by the dis-
closure of the text's horizon. This fusion also
provides a glimpse of the tradition in which
both horizons stand. Beyond the connections
of my childhood and adulthood as part of a
continuing personal history, the interpre-
tation disclosed the tradition of America's
schooling, as well as the encompassing social
tradition at work in past and present
horizons.
What do I do with this understanding? As
Gadamer stressed, the significance of
hermeneutical inquiry is in understanding
defined as historical consciousness, that is,
understanding as the existential foundation
for future action. It is understanding that
changes the way I think and talk about the
meaning of childhood art experiences; it is
critical self-understanding of my particular
relationship to the discourse of my profes-
sion. In the ontological sense, historical
consciousness means I can take up my par-
ticular place and time in the educational and
social tradition and project it into the future
in a way that is authentically my own, not
merely perpetuate unexamined, generalized
assumptions.
There are many possibilities for similar
interpretive inquiries, done either retrospec-
tively into the inquirer's own life,3 or ethno-
historically into the life of another person.
Studies might focus upon the span of an
individual's formal art schooling, childhood
and adolescent art experiences, or profes-
sional training as artist or art teacher. Even
more useful might be the study of the artistic
life of an individual who is not a professional
artist or art educator, the hobbyist or amateur
whom we professionals often dismiss without
truly understanding. The substantial theo-
retical and philosophical grounding provided
by Gadamer offers promising opportunities
for art educators to expand their critical
understanding of themselves and their
educative enterprise.
Using interpretation theory in art education research 47

Brooks, C. A. The meaning of childhood art experiences: A dialectical hermeneutic (Doctoral dissertation,
The Pennsylvania State University, 1980). Dissertation Abstracts International, 1981, 41, 3843-A (Univer-
sity Microfilms No. 8105702).
Gadamer, H-G. [Truth and method] (2nd ed.) (G. Barden & J. Cumming, Eds. and trans.). New York:
The Seabury Press, 1975.
Gadamer, H-G. The problem of historical consciousness. In P. Rabinow & W. M. Sullivan (Eds.),
Interpretive social science: A reader. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1979.
Heidegger, M. [Being and time] (J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson, trans.). New York: Harper and Row, 1962.
(Originally published, 1927.)
Linge, D. E. Introduction. In H-G Gadamer, [Philosophical hermeneutics] (D. E. Linge, Ed. and trans.).
Berkeley: University of California Press, 1976.
Palmer, R. E. Hermeneutics. Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 1969.
Proust, M. [Remembrance of things past] (7 vols.) (C. K. S. Moncrieff, trans.). New York: Vintage Books,
1970. (Originally published, 1919-1927.)
Wilson, B. The other side of evaluation in art education. In G. W. Hardiman and T. Zernich (Eds.),
Curricular considerations for visual arts education: Rationale, development, and evaluation. Champaign,
Illinois: Stipes Publishing Co., 1974.

Footnotes
1. This paper was presented at the National Art Education Association Convention in Chicago, April,
1981.

2. Effective-historical consciousness is the translation of Wirkungsgeschichtliche Bewusstein, as used in

Truth and Method (1975). Palmer (1969) translated it as historically-operative consciousness. In more
recent English writings (1979), Gadamer uses simply historical consciousness.
3. A model for a retrospective hermeneutic is Marcel Proust's well known novel Remembrance of Things
Past (1919-1927/1970).

This content downloaded from 202.43.95.117 on Thu, 14 Apr 2016 22:46:42 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms