The current edition of the UTEP Art faculty show features some strong pieces by artists who have continued to explore their usual artistic concerns.
Albert Wong has consistently been exploring questions of perception, spatial illusion and movement. Through the use of long thin lines and shadows he turns two dimensional space into three dimensions. This might not seem earth shattering, but his work is always elegant, quiet and appealing. Here he dispenses with the canvas and places his lines directly on the wall. He gives us here a sense of rising and falling as well as three-dimensionality, and though simplicity and understatement, shows what art can do; it alters our perception of space.
Anna Jaquez makes far more elaborate miniatures. Often intricately created worlds, it is in many way the opposite from Wong’s spare lines, but no less 
successful. Here she has two pieces-one of the El Paso border and the other more recent work a school room in a lunch box.
Among other strong artists here are Manuel Garza showing etchings and lithographs as well as
Francisco Delgado’s life size figures reflecting contemporary themes like Nine Sicarios.
There is also an installation called a Farm Stand shelter wear . It is a tent like affair being pulled by a bicycle. Apparently one can use it for shelter from storms or make it into a food cart. In fact, throughout the show they are going to be serving food from it. This Friday, Feb. 12, from 12-1, Saturday Feb. 20 from 3-4 and Wednesday Feb. 24 from 11-12 they will be serving herbed mozzarella and flatbread.
Coincidentally, a few days after this show opened, I found a copy of Ben Shahn’s The Shape of Content. This book published in 1957 is based on a series of lectures he gave at Harvard University during a term as the Charles Elliot Norton Professor. The first lecture explores his concerns with being at Harvard. He seemed very wary of artists at universities. While he thought in an ideal world a University would be a great place for an artist, he cited a number of “artist-teachers” as becoming teachers who used to be artists.
Of course this was given decades ago so one hopes the situation has changed, but some of his thoughts still bear repeating. He suggested that while in certain fields such as science or sociology, the faculty at great universities were viewed as expert, and there research was at the forefront of their field. it was exactly the reverse when it came to art departments. He suggested that while Universities thought art historians and art history was important to a liberal arts education, they were none too certain about having actual artists on campus.
He cites a Harvard Visual Arts committee report of the time which seems equivocal on the issue. It states in one section that “the visual arts are an integral part of the humanities and as such must assume a role of prominence in the context of higher education,” while in another section it says “It is still doubtful whether a student at Harvard can find the time to apply himself seriously to creative work in the visual arts”. and further on that “ We do not propose to inject the art school into the academic life, but rather to give the experience of art its rightful place in liberal education.” Shahn asks how people might feel about having the experience of calculus or French.
Of course, these lectures were worlds ago and the amount of creative arts programs have increased exponentially, but one wonders whether despite the myriad art programs on offer at myriad universities, they are treated with the same seriousness accorded other departments. Are the departments considered a significant source of inspiration for artists who want to continue their individual pursuits or are they regarded more as a sort of economic lifeline for artists in a world which seems uncomfortable with art exploration/
In any case, go and look at the faculty show and see what this department has wrought. It is well worth the effort.-david sokolec
