There is a lot of current dialogue about the removal of art history from New Zealand schools, and it’s prompted me to reflect on my own journey with the subject. I studied art history throughout my education. At secondary school, I can’t say I enjoyed it much (Gombrich and I never really saw eye to eye). But when I reached art school, everything changed. There was more freedom to explore areas that connected directly to practice, to dive deeply into ideas that felt urgent. This re-inspired my interest and showed me how art history could be more than simply a timeline of selected practices, artists and movements.
Reading responses calling for art history to be reinstated in schools makes me curious about the bigger picture. Its decline hasn’t happened overnight — this has been a global trend for decades. I honestly can’t remember when I first joined debates about the closure of programmes and departments, because it feels like they’ve been going on for a long time. If we’ve been aware of this precariousness for so long — with enrolments dwindling and ‘viability’ constantly questioned — what has actually been done to sustain art history as a standalone subject?
That’s the question I keep returning to. How has art history evolved to meet the needs and interests of new generations? Do we understand how people want to engage with it? Should it even still be called ‘art history’? Does it need to be strictly theoretical, or standalone? Can it be integrated with practice? How do we make it meaningful for young people who are making subject choices with future careers in mind — which many do?
Simply advocating for a subject that few want to study — while understandable — doesn’t solve the underlying issue. We need to think creatively about how art history (or whatever we call it) can be made relevant, accessible, and compelling for learners today.
For me, the issue isn’t about reinstating art history in schools but about reimagining it for learners navigating a very different world. What does it need to look like to be compelling and useful today? How can it be contextualised for relevance? And how do we ensure it’s not just surviving, but thriving, as part of our cultural and educational landscape?
We can’t turn back time — so what should art history look like now?
