Exactly. I’d prefer a “real university” for my overall quality of education, if the art classes were still decent. Having experienced the CSU art department, I think that CIA probably is a better option for me because even though CSU may have better classes for the other things, I’m feeling like they aren’t fulfilling my needs for my major. None of that matters, however, because one semester’s tuition at CIA is about the same cost as the entirety of my college education thus far. Couldn’t afford it in a million years 
Have you consulted this sculpture teacher? She might be able to give you insights into whether talking to the head of the department will help, whether painting in acrylics is really a waste of your time or not, or give you feedback as to whether changing your focus to sculpture is a good idea or not.
that sounds like a good middle ground OR do the sculpture emphasis and paint on your own time. I bet you find that working on sculpture impacts on your painting, no matter the type of paint used. You may find the approach of the sculpture instructor more amenable–and I can’t imagine it not spilling over into your painting. Plus, she’s also a painter–I’d mine her for info, teaching and guidance.
All of those are good reasons to be where you are. I also think you are moving toward a livable solution.
If you’re committed to teaching at the college level, it makes even more sense for you to learn all you can from every instructor.
I couldn’t afford the Art Institute of Chicago, either, but had a total blast in their painting extension class. CIA has similar offerings (didn’t see the cost, though).
It’s really two issues, developing your abilities as an artist v. earning academic credentials. I’d imagine other majors struggle with the same dilemma.
No, I’m definitely not committed to teaching at the college level. I don’t want to teach at any level. It’s just that having a master’s degree would make it an option should I find myself needing “a real job” in the future.
I’ve expressed my frustration with the painting teacher with her (she flat out told me she thinks his work is bad) but haven’t actually discussed what to do about it with her. It’s a good idea. I did also get her to review some of my work and help me decide which pieces to submit when I applied for the merit scholarship a couple of weeks ago. (You had to submit 6 and I’m really bad at choosing which if my stuff is better than others because I have various emotional attachments to various things that bias my judgment.)
I’ve been under the impression that real teaching jobs are few and far between. Lotsa MFA’s out there. Which is why I’ve had some wonderful experiences with instructors through extension classes (most of whom had MFA’s and couldn’t find a better gig).
Maybe I’m wrong, though, demographics change - could be that by the time you finish your MFA there will be more openings.
Why not email a couple of your old profs for guidance? They know you and your work.
Well, like I said, he let me do the first one in oil, but is insisting on acrylic for the rest of them. The painting I’m just finishing is in acrylic and I’m hating it bigtime 
Well as I said, I have zero interest in teaching. I don’t want to teach. I actively DO NOT want to teach, in fact. It’s just that should I find myself in the future needing a paycheck-type of job, it’s a side benefit of having a master’s degree that I would be able to teach at the college level. (I don’t think I am capable of teaching at a pre-college level, because I have just about zero patience with groups of children.) 99% of the reason I want a master’s degree is because I want the education to further improve my painting.
While I don’t agree with the rigidity of the acrylics-only order, don’t write off acrylics as a medium. Oil painters look down their noses at acrylics for no good reason, usually it’s the drying time or supposed lack of transparancy. The problem is that artists try to use acrylics as fast-drying oils, which they are not. It is a completely different medium and should be treated as such. There are plenty of highly transparent and beautifully vivid acrylics that can be used in a glazing technique if you so desire.
You could look at this class as an opportunity to broaden your artistic horizons. If you are so wedded to oils you won’t try anything else, then you are being as stubborn as the instructor you’re complaining about. That being said, though, if that elephant painting is typical of his work, than yuck.
Don’t skimp on paint quality if you have to get acrylics. I use only Golden Artist Colors. I think fessie’s been using the wrong kind of water-soluble oils if “disgusting” is the reaction.
Well, I already said that it’s not like I’d never do acrylics, it’s just that the type of painting that acrylic is suited for isn’t what I’m primarily interested in. I could see using it from time to time for specific projects for which it is better suited, but the vast majority of what I want to do is vastly more suited to oils. I could see taking one semester of an acrylics class just for the variety and instruction, but not the whole rest of my painting education. Also, he isn’t actually giving any instruction, so I don’t feel like I’m learning anything about acrylics more than I would learn just by experimenting with it on my own time.
From a purely practical standpoint, the difference in drying times might make it impossible for her to use oils for a lot of her assignments. Regular acrylics will dry in an hour or so. Oils can take days, and even then, they’re not completely dry. That means that she might not be able to finish assignments in the time allotted.
As for the artistic differences–well, that’s a whole can of worms that probably belongs in another thread. But I will agree with the others that learning in oils is really important. Acrylics are “easier” in a lot of ways.
This is true, but may not really apply in this case. Opal specifically says in the OP " I have yet to see any actual teaching, and my classmates who have been here for several years say that our professor doesn’t ever do any actual instruction." And that painting of his is really amateruish. Opal could certainly learn a lot from a professor with a drastically different style than her own, provided that professor had any talent or skill to begin with and/or that he ever bothered to try and teach her something in the first place.
I really don’t think an MFA is about making you a better artist. Not from what I’ve seen. It’s about developing and defending a thesis, which has more to do with trying to be historically significant than technically competent.
People say it DOES open doors. I guess it depends on where you want to sell, and how hard you’re willing to work to get there. You want New York? An MFA, or big tits and a drug addiction are probably the way to go. 
garygnu, acrylics /= water-soluble oils. I think the brand I tried was Grumbacher. My husband bought me a handful one Christmas. But y’know, I’m not into the same palette as OpalCat, maybe she’d love their colors in her monochromatic work?
When you say “not giving any instruction”, do you mean he’s silent during critiques?
Green Bean,
I do appreciate the commentary on oils vs. acrylics, but mostly I just wanted OpalCat to be aware of the limits of my artistic knowledge if she finds my input helpful.
Working on the Rembrandt I used a painting medium that speeds up the drying time on the oils. I was able to paint on it every day without much problem, so finishing assignments in time wouldn’t be an issue, I think. We typically have a few weeks for any given assignment.
The acrylics dry within minutes, even when I use a retarder medium to slow it down. So whereas on an oil painting for a given area I might go block in some of the dark areas, then go block in some of the lighter areas, then go back and blend it all together for the midtones, with acrylic you can’t do that. You’d get halfway through blocking in the darks and the ones you started with would already be bone dry before you even started with the light areas, let alone returned to try to blend them. With acrylics you have to use totally different techniques to achieve blending, and you get a totally different looking result. While it isn’t without merit, and while I can see that it would actually be preferable in some cases (even with some kinds of painting that I might want to do in the future) it is not the look or the method that I prefer or will be doing most of my future work in. This is what frustrates me so much. I could see the value (and probably would voluntarily take) a class specifically in acrylics, as a supplement to my general painting education. In fact I wish they offered a class in watercolor, because I’d love to learn how to do that, too. I would just like for the lion’s share of my painting instruction to be helping me with oils.
[note: I’m not explaining all that to you specifically, GreenBean. I was just clarifying my thoughts for general purposes.]
Yeah, but it’s like going to music school to learn to be a concert pianist but only being allowed to play the electric organ from your grandma’s basement. Why bother?
I hope you get somewhere with the department head. If not, you can always do your own work in oils and you will at least be learning about brush work and color at school. And don’t forget, your school assignments are just that: assignments. They aren’t meant to be your masterpieces.
And perhaps you will fall in love with another discipline like sculpture.
You say that you are going to this school because it’s the only school you can go to now, the only one in your location and price range. You say that you want to get your art degree because you want to go to grad school. With those being the criteria, I don’t really see that you have much cause to complain that you’re not getting the art education you would like to get or even feel you need; you didn’t select this school to get that education, and you’re not pursuing your degree with that goal. I’m not being critical, but if you settle for a sub-standard educational opportunity – and I have nothing against your school, but that’s sort of how you’re describing it – then you shouldn’t be surprised to find that the education you are receiving is sub-standard. Since this is just a stepping stone to grad school, do what you need to do to get your degree, and then go to grad school. Assuming grad school is your goal, to me extending the time it will take you to finish undergrad (by switching to sculpture) doesn’t make much sense either. IMO, you are an artist, and a talented one. This is not an art school; it’s never going to give you what you and your talent need. So take what you need from the institution and move on. It’s not that you’re getting “squat” from the experience; you’re getting the BA that you need to go to grad school. That’s what you set out for and that’s what you should expect; it may not be what you might have wanted, but it’s what you decided you needed when you chose this school.
As for going over your professor’s head: I would be very careful. Have you asked the professor directly if you can do your work in oil, explaining that’s your intended medium and where you are most happy? If you explicitly asked and he said, “No, you have to use acrylics,” did you ask him, respectfully, to explain why? If he can defend his decision to make everyone (not just you) use acrylics, it is extraordinarily unlikely that the department head is going to intervene and tell him how he has to teach his class. What you will do, almost certainly, is piss off your painting professor, the one person who is going to be most responsible for writing you the grad school recommendation letter that is most relevant to your subject (painting).
If to you the BA is just a step on the path to the MA, I would suggest you just remind yourself that “this too shall pass,” grit your teeth, and knock out the required number of paintings in acrylic. But it strikes me as unrealistic to go to a primarily non-art school and then expect the art program to either challenge or inspire an artist of your caliber. If you want to be really taught and/or challenged, you need to go to a good art school. I understand that you can’t do that, but neither can you have good art school expectations of the school you’re currently in.
He’s not silent, but he’s fairly useless. For example, we just had our midterm review. We don’t actually get graded on anything until the end of the semester, when we bring in everything we’ve done all term and it all gets graded at once. However at this midterm point he will sit down with you and look at what you’ve done so far and give you an idea of how you’re doing in the class. He said that I’m at “about an A minus” and so I asked what I could do to bring that grade up. He said “do better work.” I asked him what about my work he would suggest improving–mind you this was not defensive or anything, I wasn’t saying or implying that there isn’t room for improvement, I just wanted some sort of specific criticism that I could use to improve my work–and he said “I dunno. Just do better.”
And he seems to want us to paint his ideas rather than coming up with our own. For example, our last assignment (which I’m just finishing now) was supposed to incorporate inside/outside, a self portrait, 16th/17th century Italy, a treasure hunt, and some other things but we were pretty free to actually interpret and compose it however we wanted, as long as it fulfilled those requirements. I was discussing my ideas, and I said something about it being me and my son sitting in front of a fireplace in a modern house, but there being a painting over the fireplace of the outdoors, and maybe out the window was a street scene of 16th century Italy or something. I don’t remember exactly what I said. But his response was “why don’t you do a painting of you and your son in 16th century Italian clothes watching TV blah blah blah” and when I said that didn’t appeal to me he seemed annoyed that I didn’t want to do his idea. To me that isn’t a valuable critique or instruction.
And as far as actual physical painting techniques or methods or styles or whatever, he doesn’t teach anything.