| Catherine.jpg - 2,431 bytes, 88 downloads |
Home « Member Pages « GiggleSnots & Tatertots « Just a Nastey Journal «
if art really matters
Before you think I'm going to offer up some deep thoughts on aesthetics or art philosophy, this is not a defense of art or a declaration of why it is important. If you do not believe art matters, then you are lost already. You have chosen your side. You are dismissed.
However, if you believe art does matter, your belief is not enough.
Perhaps the war for art is already lost, I don't know. I know people who believe that. They believe everything I fight for with my site and my magazine is a waste of my time and resources. They believe this not because they don't believe in what I'm doing, but because they feel it is already too late, and it won't make any difference.
So, how do I know what side of the fight you're on? How do I determine who is with me? First shouldn't I answer what art is? Why it means?
Perhaps, but I'm not sure those answers clarify much of anything. My definition of art is very broad, and my tendency is to accept that an artist is who-so-ever decides to be one. But this is irrelevant. Bad art, foolish critics, and stupid people pretending to be artists are destroying our culture.
Yes, there is such a thing as bad art. If you do not believe that there is such a thing as bad art: thank you, you're dismissed.
No is not completely subjective. If you believe it is completely subjective: thank you, you're dismissed.
By this point, I am sure many have mentally tuned this out, or stopped reading all together, and that's fine, they've chosen their side in this war.
What is the fight? The fight to create things of enduring beauty and relevance. To celebrate inspired and inspiring work that lifts up humanity. To recognize what is most special and hold it up as a beacon to guide us to be more than we are.
And some will say, Why do the previous statements matter, most everyone is on the same side of that fight? Because if there is no standard, no commonly held belief in what is great art, then the rest is a lie.
Buying pathetic amateurish art and saying it is wonderful demeans all the truly wonderful art. Telling an artist that his 'chair painted purple and covered in white roses' is a brilliant anti-war statement belittles the art which truly is brilliant.
I am not defending, promoting or attacking art schools or art training. I do not put down the highly-educated, the papered and certified, the self-taught, the un-taught, or the unconventional. But I think it is important for all who seek to make the world a better place to demand that greatness is more than 'decent' or 'adequate.'
As a poet and a writer, it might seem a stretch for me to comment and much such all-encompassing statements regarding all art, particularly as I often make the distinction that these are crafts. The distinction between art and craft might indeed be both valid and important, but I'll leave that to you to decide. I think quality is the most vital first step to resuscitating our culture. And that is not dependent on the media, the method or the message.
Critics can rationalize and distract with fancy words and convoluted theories, and the vast majority of society will flap along behind them parroting their voices until every fool believes the lie of adequacy. The critics will be obvious as they glorify messages which mimic their world view over method and media. This is damaging, no doubt. The so-called artist they glorify will be the dregs and the mediocre. The signal of the gray flat nothing will be loud, and the noise so endless that greatness will be forever lost in a fog of nothing.
The new glorified artists declare themselves the new masters, and at their feet students flock and take up the banner of nothing and proclaim their drivel classic. This is not a future tense. This is now.
Even this very moment new poets swarm to the 'published poets' and the banality of half-wit professors professing a new liturgy devoid of an understanding of past masterworks. The celebration of the me-generations of the 50s, 60s, 70s... to present destroys the foundation upon which their work should have been informed.
Critics celebrate squares on colored backgrounds that our 4-year-olds could make as easily, and splatters our dogs can create. Idiot savants find poetry in the spew of computers and tiny-brained thinkers scream out that the audience makes the art.
What the audience perceives is more important than the message of the artist, who can possibly argue with such delightfully democratic ideals.
If i like it, it is good art. This is the message. Composition. Clarity, Craftmanship. Technique. Complexity. And, perhaps above all, beauty. These don't matter. It is all individual taste. The standards float lost and forgotten in a sea of plebeian wailing for recognition of their own special gray nothings.
The decay of greatness into a bland elegant all embracing elephantine fecal spew is soft, sweetly scented and subtle. Perhaps it is too late to re-educate. Perhaps there are no true masters left and it is only apprentices wearing the masters robes who wander the town square as happy idiots.
Maybe you can answer that or me, I don't know. Still, I say, if you are still here, if this makes any sense to you at all, then it is time to ask some questions:
1) Do you look at art, be it visual, aural or written and judge it in relation to the great works of the past? (As opposed to merely critically acclaimed contemporary work, or worse still, to some perceived average work.)
2) Do you compliment people who attempt art and call them artists, rather than offer them substantial criticism and real comment that helps them realize how far they have to go before they are great?
3) Don't you judge your own creations with a cold eye and realize the true level of the work in relation to the greatest works throughout history?
4) Don't you demand that art inspire?
5) Don't you demand that art have clear meaning?
6) Don't you demand that art be beautiful?
7) Do you strike out with your own opinion on works of art -- willing to stand up and celebrate art that you feel is exceptional -- regardless what the opinions of the masses might be?
8) Don't you hold back the honored title of artist rather than bestow it on everyone who creates anything that might be called art?
9) Don't you actively search out the great works of art and try to learn why they are great, then apply that knowledge as you find art in the world?
10) Do you truly believe art matters?
If you can't answer yes to all those questions, then you're dismissed.
Otherwise, welcome to the fight.
Files
Comments
2- Anstey
on Feb. 4 2008

3- Mosquitobyte
on Feb. 4 2008
hmmm, I agree with you on all points bar one, art need not be inspirational, (one could argue against beauty also). Much of my work is written in a manner to elicit the very opposite.
Art needs to be emotive; inspiration is simply what the artless lack.
My humble opinion.
Mos.
PS.... Then again, depends on what definition of the root word inspire one applies to the question. Some would say I inspire dread!!! :P
4- Rene'
on Feb. 4 2008
clap, clap, clap....I really do agree with you pretty much across the board on this. I do feel that beauty is not the same for everyone though and therein lies the rub! I was actually drawn into this read with your caption and the search for the sublime which is a particular favorite passtime for me. All great art, for me anyway, takes me into the sublime. Then again, the thing that does it for me may well not do it for anyone/everyone else. Still, I thing this deserves applause....
----- LIFE: I messed up, can I have a 'do over'?
I am orbiting, I don't know where, but I am orbiting something!
5- Derma Kaput
on Feb. 4 2008
Art is about execution, and I don't know how effective an artist's abilities would be without a certain amount of exposure to what came before, and what encompases the quality of what came before. I live on the outskirts of a thriving community of artists - when I go to coffee shops and restaurants, they're frequently filled with the work of local artists. Some of it is inspired, some is not. Henry James, speaking of the art of the novel, once said something to the effect of the novelist (as artist) must have absolute freedom of form (on one hand) but held to only one criteria (on the other): that the output be genuinely interesting. In other words, the artists ability to make their output genuinely interesting by effective use of craft is the bottom line. Tastes may vary, but craft, creativity, and the freedom to find an outlet for both, creates great art. So, I agree with the spirit of your essay - but I think someone could effectively paint flowers on an old chair and create great art. Likewise, many effort to do the same might be laughable. Bad art has often times been lauded, for various reasons, within its era of creation, while excellent art has languished. Time has a way of stripping away the influence of fad and pretense, letting genuine art speak for itself. The best way to fight your battle is to pick up the brush, pen, or whatever, and seek to create something interesting refined from an informed and inspired practice of creativity itself - then fight off the urges to celebrate mediocrity.
By the way, Art School Confidential is a wonderfully dark and cynical movie. Well worth seeing.
6- Anstey
on Feb. 4 2008
I was being a bit facetious, i suppose, with my purple chair (it was an allusion to a previous private conversation on this very matter, and it struck me as so very sharp from that person, and is so very not from me)
But, I actually don't think the precise standard of greatness is as important as the agreement that such a standard should exist and be lofty.
Beauty is not about pretty.
Inspiration is not about happy.-- Julie Ann Cook
One can be inspired to righteous rage, and find beauty in a rusting hulk in the boatyard. It is vital not that we agree that something inspires or that something is beautiful, but that we agree that art should strive for those things and great art will achieve those things.
Bad art is irrelevant, except in as much as it chews away at the flesh of culture. It is great art that must be celebrated and defended.
I totally and completely agree that a great artist could paint a chair and arrange flowers and create something sublime.
7- Anstey
on Feb. 4 2008
8- Derma Kaput
on Feb. 4 2008
9- Rene'
on Feb. 4 2008
"Share your opinions, create alternatives, laud what you feel is universally good. Someone else might disagree, then you have a great conversation - depending on temperments. Here's to good, intense conversations about art. " Derma.
I agree with this so much that I can't even find words for how I feel. Here's to conversation created by differing opinions, by interested minds, and by alternate avenues for individual tastes and likes. How many artists have been ignored in 'their own time' only to be famous now? How much GREAT work has been designated as foolhardy and not worth the while only to be lauded as the ultimate at a later date in history. The continuation for the sublime in every generation is an aquistion that should live on in healthy argument forever!! I love a good disagreement as long as all parties can do so without anger and I never get angry over someones opinion because I realize, 'that I have my own as well' but I love the talk that has been generated over this subject matter. It is stimulating and has given me a learning experience that I would otherwise be deprived of.
I love the difference of opinions on this site and the feeling that we may all express our opinions without hesitation!!
----- LIFE: I messed up, can I have a 'do over'?
I am orbiting, I don't know where, but I am orbiting something!
10- Julie
on Feb. 4 2008
" "Beauty" doesn't necessarily mean "pretty." "Inspirational" doesn't have to mean "happy." "
...which is close to what you had up, and not quite as well stated as what you'd posted, but if I'm going to be anal, why not here?)
One of the biggest things I took from Art I in high school with Mrs. Jane Cerilli, was that time was the true test of any work of art. Only in hindsight of a century or more could we know what actually "qualified" as art. I agree that is a pretty solid benchmark for judgment of art... but that we still need to promote and fight for the contemporary artistic endeavors which we feel are worthy of note, to encourage the artist & to better direct & shape the arts as a whole.
...or maybe I'm just talkin' out of my butt.
11- Derma Kaput
on Feb. 4 2008
12- Julie
on Feb. 4 2008
13- Alcuin of York
on Feb. 10 2008
Gee Julie, just make sure you don't sit on steroids!
For all, I strongly suggest reading a short book by Tom Wolfe: The Painted Word. It's a non-fiction book about the modern art movement, told by someone with a good knowledge of art & art history. And what Wolfe says applies as well to the art of writing.
Alcuin
14- Celticlion
on Apr. 26 2008
Catherine.jpg
15- Mosquitobyte
on Apr. 26 2008
Excellently put Celticlion, 'tis pretty much how I approach my drivel also.
Mos

1- Julie
on Feb. 4 2008
... it's shiny here in the light!