Bharath Reddy
My recent encounter proved to be disheartening as I accompanied my son to a trial class. Despite arriving promptly, no staff was present, and observing departing students heightened my apprehension. Patiently, I awaited an announcement for the trial class attendees, noting that this was a paid session despite its title. Scheduled for a 12:30 PM commencement, the class commenced belatedly due to the tardiness of the instructor, compelling me to leave my son in their care. Upon returning after 90 minutes, the teacher exhibited my son's semi-completed canvas, prompting my signature on an iPad, without clarifying the purpose or content of the accompanying instructions. The implication was clear—resuming the next week would entail building upon the same canvas. Inquiring about additional classes revealed an unsettling lack of diversity beyond basic painting. The absence of specialized disciplines like pencil art cast doubt on the comprehensive artistic education provided. Post-class discussions with my son unveiled a curriculum devoid of fundamental artistic principles such as brush techniques, strokes, or color theory, with the supplied image acting as a template and pre-existing colors negating any exploration in color mixing. My initial aspiration, envisioning my son's artistic growth, has been met with disappointment, deeming the trial class a futile investment of time and money. The inconclusive artwork is ostensibly valued at $26, further exacerbating the disillusionment.