We all remember from back in high school reading those glossy college brochures filled with photos of suspiciously happy students. There was the guy throwing the Frisbee on a lawn, the diverse group of friends chatting in the union and, like clockwork, the artistic-looking student painting outside.

Stanford’s 2007 brochure is not too different. On page 15, it features a small photo of a girl working on her own art piece. The message is that art is an important part of the Stanford experience. Certainly this is true for a small but enthusiastic group of students here. In general, though, Stanford suffers from an arts deficiency --on both the participation and the resource ends. The good news is that the students and administration are trying to fix this. It seems, however, to be puzzlingly persistent.

First, it is important to note that Stanford actually has many arts resources that, despite their quality, lack undergraduate participation. Stanford Lively Arts, for instance, is a very professional community resource. But not once can I remember a student going to one of their shows. Cantor Arts Center, while well known, exists more in students’ imaginations than on their list of places to visit. Even their “First Thursdays” parties, designed for undergraduates, are usually attended by a small group of students. Finally, KZSU, the campus radio station, has an enormous collection of blues, jazz, rock and world music available to students affiliated with the station. But, faced with relatively low undergraduate participation, the station is mostly run by alumni and community members.

Low student participation in the arts is an important piece of the puzzle, but sometimes the resources don’t meet the demand. The studio art department is a case in point. The number of spaces for arts classes is usually limited. Often, non-studio art majors--like freshmen and undecided sophomores--do not even get a chance to take an introductory class. I was twice denied a spot in Painting I, for example. Also, the Cummings Art Building, home to the studio art and art history departments, is so cramped that many faculty have had to move to other buildings. Departments always compete for more space--scarcity is a fact of life. But if allotted space is at all a measure of priorities, then art is not currently a very high priority. This, however, is changing.

The administration has launched the Stanford Arts Initiative as part of the almighty Stanford Challenge. The Initiative’s goals are to admit more arts-oriented students, fund more arts-related practices, fund art programs in residences and, in the long-term, create better facilities. This plan entails building an “arts district” adjacent to Cantor. This area would house a huge new concert hall courtesy of the Bings and new facilities for the art department. It will take shape over the next decade.

So, Stanford has a lot of great resources, lacks others, and is generally trying to improve. But will this ultimately make a difference? The problem is puzzlingly persistent. A Daily article about low arts participation ran back in 1999, for instance. Maybe, in the end, Stanford is too pre-professional and too tech-heavy to ever be particularly artistic, even with gradual improvements. I am tempted to trace the situation back to the admissions office and the type of students that it accepts--a lot of doers, but few thinkers. A lot of engineers, but few poets.

The answer, though, is not one-sided. Most of my friends agree that the arts at Stanford are weak, and knee-jerk blame a lack of money. The problem, however, is more complex than that, and certainly some blame has to go the undergraduates themselves.

Send Paul a JPEG of your latest sketch at pcraft "at" stanford.edu.