Future Perfect

The phrase “the children are our future”, widely disseminated through the vocal talents of the troubled singer Whitney Houston, has morphed into a cozy cliché that allows us to demonstrate concern for children without having to do a damned thing. Sentimental intentions take the place of meaningful action. But as concerned citizens, we need to ask an important question in response to this state of non-affairs:

What would we do if we took the idea that “the children are our future” seriously?

But before we try to answer that question, let’s poke around some in the cliché itself. Here are some of the lyrics to the song “Greatest Love Of All” that the phrase comes from:

I never found anyone to fulfill my needs
A lonely place to be
So I learned to depend on me

The song is not really about children or the future, but actually about being lonely and uncared for and learning to fend for one’s self. (Unfortunately, the gifted Ms. Houston seems to have gotten the lonely and uncared for part down, but has not done so well on the learning-to-take-care-of-yourself part.) The song has some dark and serious origins. The lyrics were written by Linda Creed and the music was composed by Michael Masser. According to Wikipedia:

When Linda Creed wrote the lyrics, she was in the midst of her struggle with breast cancer. The words describe her feelings about coping with a terminal illness and being a young mother. She eventually succumbed to the disease and died at the age of 37. It has been rumoured that Michael Masser hated the lyrics, and somewhat callously told her so when he visited her in the hospital.

Again, from Wikipedia:

"Greatest Love of All" has in certain circles become shorthand for cheesy music or kitsch. Among the many such references in the pop culture are:

• Patrick Bateman, the titular character of the film American Psycho names the song as a favourite.
• On the episode "Francine's Flashback" of American Dad!, Stan makes Houston (impersonated by comedian Debra Wilson) sing this song for his wife in exchange for a fix of cocaine (in a reference to Houston's crack addiction, which became a tabloid sensation of the late 1990s).

So if the wildly popular song referencing children and the future is actually about adult loneliness, and has been reduced to a joke, what should we be doing to secure a more perfect future for our children and ourselves?

For one thing, we need to do more than just mouth clichés about the importance of a good education, and start committing serious dollars to public schools. Illinois is near the bottom of the national barrel in funding public education. And since public school budgets are based on local taxes, the huge discrepancy between what wealthy communities can spend per student and what most urban and rural communities can spend per student is simply absurdly unjust.

And what would be the role of the arts in this recommitment to public education?

ARTISTS:
There would be artists (of all disciplines, representing all ethnicities, classical and contemporary, high brow and low brow, techie and acoustic) in our schools. Not just when there was a grant or a special project. Not just for an occasional field trip to the Art Institute or Orchestra Hall. Practicing artists would be a regular part of the teaching force.
Now, there are lots of reasons to object to such a plan, such as:
• it costs too much
• kids need to learn to read and write, not dance and draw
• not all kids are talented
These reasons are all very reasonable, all very sane, and all completely wrong.
It does not cost too much to have creative adults in our schools if those adults play a crucial role in releasing our students’ and teachers’ initiative, which is what our schools are supposed to be doing in the first place, and is what artists actually do. It would be a wise use of precious dollars.
In a post-industrial world, in an information economy, kids do indeed need to become literate, but not just text literate, but also image literate, sound literate, movement literate. And in fact, they already are. What do you think they are doing, whenever they have access, with all those computers, those game-boys, those iPods? I know lots of adults bemoan the isolating effects of computers, but the information technology world is one of the few places where children currently have some freedom and power. If adults want young people to be more involved in the “real world”, children must have more opportunities for making real choices in that world. And what do young learners need in order to focus all that run-away creativity they are exploring in the computer world? They need artists.
And why not direct those artists to concentrate on the kids with artistic career potential? Because art is not just for the talented. Art for everyone.

OPPORTUNITIES TO SHOW AND SHARE:
Learners (and this includes teachers, who if they are any good, are not just instructors, but also model learners) need places and opportunities to show and share their learning with others. Because learning doesn’t become wisdom until it has a public life between the learner and other learners. This means the creation of dedicated, respectful spaces and times for students to show and talk about their work with others. Some of our arts education organizations are beginning to provide such opportunities. (see www.capeweb.org/exhibit.html) We need more.

RESPECT, NOW:
But most important, we need to stop thinking, “the children are our future”, and recognize that they are our present, in all their fragile beauty and strength.

Arnold Aprill
Founding and Creative Director
Chicago Arts Partnerships in Education (CAPE)
www.capeweb.org