AUSTIN, Texas (AP) -- Until they found the topless photos, Austin High School officials considered Tamara Hoover an excellent art teacher with a knack for helping students find their creativity.
While I don’t have a very high opinion of the state of Texas (after all they gave us George W.), I have trouble believing that nude art pictures (not even presented in class) would be a reason for termination. The first thing everyone has to remember, in this case, is that the events took place in the city of Austin – a city that takes pride in its eccentricities. The second is the concept of moral ambiguity. The school district states that teachers are to be held to a higher moral standard and that is their reason for seeking termination; but who is to judge the specific attributes of this higher morality? Do we follow guidelines as provided by the Nation of Islam and don’t allow her to teach male students; or do we follow the traditionally southern sect of Pentecostal Christians and require her to wear no make-up, long denim skirts with tennis shoes and long hair with 1980’s feathered bangs? Maybe the Mormon approach is followed so the teacher’s lounge only has caffeine-free sodas and hot water in place of coffee. Then again the Church of Christ standard would ban school dances and not allow faculty to eat at restaurants that serve alcohol. Whose moral compass leads the way?
Or maybe this has nothing to do with art or the fact that this teacher served as a (sometimes nude) model in her free time for an art photographer. Maybe it has more to do with the fact that the art photographer was also the teacher’s lesbian partner… which returns us to the idea of a higher moral standard. Does becoming a teacher force a person to sell their individuality for $30,000/year (often less)? Is that the current going rate for our freedom? Is Ms. Hoover selfish for wanting it both ways? For wanting to teach and share her knowledge as well as live her life in whatever way makes her happy? Of course she is – and that’s her right. Whether it is artistic expression or lifestyle freedom, doesn't really matter. What does matter is her right to make choices based on her own ability to be selfish.
The Sunday Morning show, this week, was obviously themed towards Father’s day. One segment dealt with the changes between generational approaches to fatherhood. A father discussed how he arranged his work schedule to optimize the amount of free time he could spend with his children. Ironically, when interviewed, his own father was worried that his son would feel too much of a sense of loss once his children left home, because he had never spent time for himself. While I agree with the grandfather, I believe it reaches beyond parenting. Each life is our own to waste or spend. When I die, if I missed out on something in life, the only person I can blame is myself. This is true for everyone. The teacher in Austin has a responsibility to fulfill her teaching contract by encouraging students through knowledge and example while on campus or during school-related functions. Ultimately, though, she has a commitment to herself, to live her life in a way that makes her happy. The school district did not purchase her “after-hours” individuality when they signed her to a teaching position. Personally, I would not have released nude self-portraits on the internet, whether I worked as a teacher or not (by the way… none exist). But that has more to do with my own sense of Midwestern modesty, than freedom of expression.
Art is the most selfish thing we can do with our lives. That’s what makes it so addictive. If we didn’t choose to selfishly claim our lives as our own, the work would never come. – DN
No comments:
Post a Comment