Transformation of how we visualise culture is seems controversial but as we look through the history of art and design it contradicts this and suggests that the problem re-occurs, of art and design being noisy and crowded, the multiplicity.
Artists tend to go towards the raw data and focus on trying to quantify something complicated into a simplified way to digest the information quickly. The aim isn't to simplify but to generate a new kind of complexity, foreground a problem rather then a solution.
Modernism is massive complex terrain, artistic and literacy modernism are both fixated on the idea of this multiplicity. Gertrude stein starts to produce work focused on the idea that the fragmentation of experience, but does not like the narrative seen as the framework for a piece of work.
Experimental modernist techniques include that time is subjective, the intensity of sensation and how you can tame the experience or do the co,plate opposite. For example a stream of consciousness a pragmatism published by William James in 1997, consciousness then does not appear to itself as chopped up in bits, it is nothing joined; it flows a river or a stream are the metaphors by which the most naturally described. In talking of it hereafter, let's call it the stream of thought, consciousness, or subjective life.
Along side this interest of multiplicity in the arts there is also the same thought in science.
Dewey art takes place in a material environment, he influences the Bauhaus as his thinking of art and design is so unique. He stresses the idea of intelligence over reason, so we're thinking about a logical form of the word and Dewey thinks intelligent is considering the materials of the problem and making intervention that works for now, the making of them is important. There is an emphasis on constructivism, from a pragmatist perspective there is a craft and theory to making something here is a sense of constructivism. Because there is a craft there is a process to the construction of your work.
James Wilkins and his book why art can't be taught he traces this debate thought the book. His argument is that they tried to teach maths and other classical forms of knowledge there are massive problems with instituting that into arts education we want something new not something timeless it induces decorum and it doesn't have the drama of post modernism or modernism. Art wants something to be happening not a timeless way of doing the craft otherwise it is bland work that doesn't have the vibrancy that we want. Artists should be independent by the state and for briefs to have a loose investigation.
With the inception of the Bauhaus the agenda of the institution it was about experimentation in experience even thought the work was quite angled, the students were drilled in the thinking of colour shape and lines. To increase the sensitivity that it's often the idea that the students would learn how to "see". As new people come in the institution you get a shift in its agenda. They get more interested into design becoming a universal language as human psychology as a single experience.
