Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/11/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]The MFA is good for a couple of things. (I think.) 1) It's the most advanced degree you can get in studio art. Also, performance such as music. 2) As such it is required if you wish to teach (photography, say) at a graduate level in a University's art program. 3) As an "artist", your degrees are looked at in your curriculum vitae (resume). Along with one-man shows, group shows, and perhaps a BFA, the MFA is important. Not to bring up a former topic, but it's an "art" world thing. None of this means doodley-squat in the freelance photography world, editorial world, or here in Leica world or much of anyplace else. But if you're in the "art" world or University "art" world it's almost essential. It's also a chance to spend two years working intensely on your studio art (photography) culminating in an MFA show (as opposed to a thesis for other Master degrees). My alma mater--Indiana University--use to have an excellent MFA program. It was run by an historically important photographer named Henry Holmes Smith. Henry will probably make most of you run for cover when I tell you that he made his pictures without a camera. He swirled oil around in a negative carrier and printed that. But, he was an excellent and challenging teacher. BTW, I'm married to an MFA who got her's in sculpture at Texas Christian University. What can I say? John Fulton Fort Worth - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html