When all else fails...study

As I have already mentioned, the time to choose classes for next semester has come, and in thinking about this I have been thinking about my major. I am an Art History major which really has no place in the real world (I'm sorry but my alternative, English, did not either). I have always wanted to write, which hey I'm doing that right now. But no really, my goal is to someday finish a novel I started (slash have an opening paragraph to) on my grandfather and his life. It may seem a boring topic, but only until you actually look at my grandfather's belief systems and the role they played in his life. But that is not where I'm going here. My point is, that I don't feel as though one can be taught how to write and so I veered away from the obvious choice of English for a major and turned towards Art History.

Art History is an interesting subject. While it is all historical, it does not fall under a social science class, but a humanities class. It takes no artistic talent, yet you get to spend your time admiring gorgeous works of art. It's like wandering around a museum all day (and for me that's time well spent). This all leads to something my professor once said about the discipline: Art History is for artists who have no talent for art. For some reason that has stuck with me. In his case, his father was a fairly well known artist and trained him in drawing and painting. When he was far enough along, his father realized he had no talent...or at least not enough...and so started him in the direction of studying works of art. I'm not sure why some people are drawn to the discipline, whether they have any talent in the arts or not, but I found I feel my path was somewhat like my professor's. As a child I loved to draw and paint, and was told I was fairly good...until at about 14, my talent no longer improved and my art kept coming out looking like a child had drawn this. At that point I was one of those dejected art students who defends themselves with the argument that they could paint just as well as Jackson Pollock and so he had no talent either. Needless to say, I am no longer of the feeling, but it did lead me to Art History. If I couldn't use my inspiration for creating art, I might as well spend my time studying the results of genius' inspirations. I now know that Pollock had vision and insight, he did not just splatter paint, he had a theory behind his practice and was the first to think of art in that way; as was Duchamp (a urinal can be art...you just have to explain why and do it first to be recognized). And of course, you have to have the talent to see everything as a possible work of art.