This paper discusses the constitution of spaces of inclusion and exclusion in artistic education, through a genealogy of the creation of this discipline, considering Portugal as a case study. This research questions the paradox of artistic education: being an eminently open discipline, intrinsically transdisciplinary, and increasingly extended in its objectives of inclusion, it also carries cultural theses about exclusion. What is and is not, legitimately, artistic education? Has it always been the same? How has it been moving inside and around the curricula in public, private, mandatory and vocational schooling? The benchmarks about what is and what is not artistic education, who is legitimated to judge it, to and to practice practices, and who allowed the definition of the discipline, has historical reasons that it is important to re-interrogate, the from the present, from the ever-present tension between 'arts' and 'education' (Baldacchino, 2015). The populations that may or may not be included come toghether with the disciplinary displacements that, historically, have allowed the continuity and/or enlargement of the targeted populations.

In a cross-national study, Bamford wondered about the actual uses of the definition of Arts Education, concluding that “The term ‘arts education’ is culture and context specific. The meaning of the term varies from country to country, with specific differences between economically developed and economically developing countries”. At the same time, it also concludes that there are at least two basic distinctions ‘”education in the arts’ (e.g., teaching in fine arts, music, drama, crafts) and education through the arts (e.g., the use of arts as a pedagogical tool in other subjects, such as numeracy, literacy and technology)” (Bamford, 2009, p. 11). The definition is valid for this country, and the movements of education by the art - that were different from all the others that previously were placed – is precisely the first insider exclusion. In fact, does artistic education begin here, or back there, where modern pedagogy assembled an idea of curriculum for the arts in different settings separated of vocational training?

When UNESCO places the universal human right as the first aim of Arts Education, for all learners, “including those who are often excluded from education, such as immigrants, cultural minority groups, and people with disabilities”, it is the top of a long line of struggles against several other exclusions: gender, ethnicity, socio-cultural origin. As if Artistic Education was always aiming at the surpassing of new borders. Has it already surpassed those it aimed at in the 1950s?

Here I would like to focus on a case study and I choose for this purpose my country, Portugal.

By the end of the 18^th century, artistic education was specifically addressed to include the marginal populations, orphans, the poor, women (Ó, Martins & Paz, 2013). The moment of the consolidation of the discipline of artistic education occurred in the 1950s, within the private foundation of Calouste Gulbenkian, which sponsored the Education Through the Art movement (Nóvoa & Ó, 2006). New inclusions (and exclusions) were drawn. Impacted by the course of this movement, new subjects were built, for example, musical education (Barreiros, 1999). By the 1990’s, new partnerships were experimented, in an approach to the community that stated an acute perception that the school moved away from the community in which it was inserted. At present, inclusion is directed at a highly segmented society. But why is it that arts education aims at including what is firstly named as excluded; whereas the learning to be an artist process is still very restricted, as in the example of music vocational training? (Fernandes, Ó, Paz, 2014).

I’m using the genealogy method outlined by Friedrich Nietzsche and developed by Michel Foucault (1984) to understand the borders of inclusion and exclusion within the arts education field. Genealogy has been described as a method that uses history to understand the present, that assumes an emphasis on the continuous interaction during the elaboration of theories and hypothesis, and that tries to reflect upon the positioning of the researcher (Varela, 2001, pp. 108). It stresses the relationship between powers and the body, which is “the inscribed surface of events” (Foucault, 1984, pp. 83). Genealogy has a task: “to expose a body totally imprinted by history and the process of history’s destruction of the body” (p. 83). Historical perspective is achieved through the identification of the moment of emergency, which is not to be mistaken by origin – the latter is taken in metahistorical and teleological readings but it is no more than an effect on speech itself. Genealogy is thus about the discursive irruption of a problem, the entry of forces in confrontation. The genealogical insight privileges details and accidents in a non-linear understanding of discontinuous events (pp. 77-84). This method was used in previous research as a technique to understand the Portuguese arts education historical context, namely of “genius” as a central apparatus is intertwined with the emergence of genius as a technology of speech responsible for the rarefying of school practices and the elitist split of the learning populations according to their social background was identified from the end of the 19th to the beginning of the 20th century (Gomes, 2002; Ó, Martins & Paz, 2013; Paz, 2014), but realizing it that assembles potential for inclusive/exclusive learning (Paz, 2017). It intends to carry out a genealogy based on a documentary approach, namely based on the publications that, in Portugal, have arisen about Artistic Education, from different perspectives of society (politicians, technicians, professionals, academics). In this respect, particular attention should be paid to the documentary core of the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation and the library of its’ Pedagogical Institute, where the works and debates about the arts education were firstly held at the end of the 1958.

The history of art education is, in my view, is the history of marking new frontiers for the educational realities that have emerged, at least since the late 18th century throughout Europe. The case of Portugal, as a southern country that until now has maintained distinctions between artistic education for all and artistic training tending vocationally only for some, in a highly elitist system, shows well these tensions, way before the arts education emerged as a discipline. Southern European music training is essentially forged in a specialized paradigm, constituting a specific branch within the education system, whereas in Anglo-Saxon tradition educative designers choose to spread the musical education in regular education, with the support of specialized schools (Fernandes et al., 2007, pp. 205-ss). And yet, it will not be in countries like Portugal that the definition of Artistic Education finds a wider spectrum of meanings, and where the borders are in practice much more diluted? This is were my discussion would continue.

Baldacchino, J. (2015). Art ± Education: The paradox of the ventriloquist’s soliloquy. Sysiphus, 3(1), 62-79. Retrieved at: http://revistas.rcaap.pt/sisyphus/article/view/7719 Barreiros, M.J. (1999). A disciplina de canto coral no período do Estado Novo. (Master thesis). Faculdade de Ciências Sociais e Humanas, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal. Bamford, A. (2009). The wow factor. Global research compendium on the impact of the arts in education. New York: Waxmann. Fernandes, D.; Ó, J.R. & Paz, A.L. (2014). Da génese das tradições e do elitismo ao imperativo da democratização: A situação do ensino artístico especializado. In M.L. Rodrigues (org.ª), 40 anos de políticas de educação em Portugal: Vol. 2 (pp. 149-198). Lisbon: Almedina. Fernandes, D.; Ó, J. R.; Ferreira M.; Marto, A.; Paz, A. & Travassos, A. (2007). Estudo de Avaliação do Ensino Artístico. Lisbon: University of Lisbon. Retrived at: http://repositorio.ul.pt/handle/10451/5501 Foucault, M. (1984). Nietzsche, Genealogy, History. In P. Rabinow, The Foucault Reader (pp. 76-97). New York: Pantheon. Gomes, C. (2002). Discursos sobre a ‘especificidade’ do ensino artístico: A sua representação histórica nos séculos XIX e XX (Master thesis). Universidade de Lisboa, Faculdade de Psicologia e Ciências da Educação, Lisbon, Portugal. Martins, C.S.S. (2012). As narrativas do génio e da salvação: a invenção do olhar e a fabricação da mão na Educação e no Ensino das Artes Visuais em Portugal (de finais de XVIII à primeira metade do século XX) (PhD thesis). Instituto de Educação, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal. Retrived at: http://repositorio.ul.pt/handle/10451/5733 Nóvoa, A. & Ó, J.R. (2007). Educação. In A. Barreto (Coord.) Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian – 50 anos: Vol. 2. Lisbon: Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian. Ó, J. R.; Martins, C. & PAZ, A. (2013). From pupil to artist: the dynamics of Genius, Status and Inventiveness in Art Education in Portugal. In T.S. Popkewitz (Ed.), (Re)visioning The History of Education: Transnational Perspectives On the Questions, Methods and Knowledge (pp.157-178). New York: Palgrave. Retrieved at: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9781137000705_8 Paz, A.L.F. (2017). Can genius be taught?: Debates in Portuguese music education (1868-1930). European Education Research Journal, 16(4), 504-516. Retrieved at: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1474904117692343 Paz, A.L.F. (2014). Ensino da Música em Portugal (1868-1930) (PhD thesis). Instituto de Educação, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal. Retrived at: http://repositorio.ul.pt/handle/10451/18383 UNESCO (2006). Road map for arts education. The word conference on arts education: building creative capacities for the 21st century. Retrieved at: http://www.unesco.org/fileadmin/multimedia/HQ/CLT/CLT/pdf/Arts_Edu_RoadMap_en.pdf. Varela, J. (2001). Genealogy of education. In T. Popkewitz, B. Franklyn & M. Pereyra (2001). Cultural History and Education (pp. 109-124). New York: RoutledgeFalmer.