Monday, September 3, 2012

It's not so easy...

... keeping up with this blog. Considering that I've never been able to maintain even a paper journal or diary, I'm going to pat myself on the back and say 'ok, not so bad.'

For fun, I post below the email conversations I have had with my friend Phil (from Tai Chi class) about art. I think they began with a question about how do I judge my own and others' art, and how is art distinguished from craft? As all of you surely know, this is the perennial question and there are many different ways to make that distinction.

I believe the initial conversation had me taking the stance that as long as I am judging my work honestly, there is no difference that signifies between art and craft, since each person produces/sees the product through the lens of his/her own life experience and aesthetics...

Phil (re: Arts vs. Crafts):

... further to our discussion, if a drawing is intended to be a literal representation is its merit then solely in its accuracy?
If a writing is solely to express an idea is clarity the measure of its quality?
So, can a drawing or writing be solely "non-artistic"?  Are not either mode of expression necessarily in part artistic?

Does this test, however, a limit on your proposition that beauty lies solely in the eye of the beholder?


In re-reading and thinking about your questions and the points you make, I believe I must insist on my original point (if I remember it correctly).

Every interaction between people involves communication, whether written, visual, or unwritten and even unintended. Think of 'body language'. Think of sitting in a cafe watching people walk by. How much can you tell about them - whether or not you are correct is irrelevant I think - just by seeing their expressions, the speed or jauntiness of their step, etc.?

Also, a second point.

Each individual person has a life experience that informs his or her interpretation of the entire world/universe. Communicating between any two people is hit or miss at best, and that is only if both are attempting to communicate/understand.

Every human being who is interested enough in the world (and with survival at stake, who is not?) has learned to interpret the cues received from every source.

If you, the artist (painter or writer or photographer) are trying to communicate with your product, that is inherently an artistic endeavor, given the vast spaces between humans and their experiences which inform their ability to interpret your attempts.

All you can do is your best, and hope for the best.
So it's all art...


Now, I'm still struggling with the logical follow-on (I cannot say "consequences"), not focusing on just communication, but on the nature of reality.  I've heard very credible and intelligent persons refer to one person's reality as existing independently of others' perceptions.  However, if each person's perception has equal validity, at some point, actually, quite frequently, those realities must conflict.  At some point, objective reality should logically exist.

If I'm trying honestly to communicate my perception of reality, and not doing it for self validation, am I not doing what you try to do in a painting?  If however that perception invalidates, as inevitably it must, another's perception of reality, then is communication essentially a effort to persuade the other or others of one's own perception?  Is that not really what your paintings do?

Now, here's another formulation to try to reconcile, or perhaps not even, apparent inconsistencies.  Your expressions may inform others as to perceptions they did not necessarily reject, but just never appreciated.  So, maybe the conflicts I refer to are really failures to appreciate others perceptions.  So, then, the issue for each of us is to try to be open to different perceptions to see if we have or have not yet fully appreciated them.


Do you really have such a firm knowledge of the universe and everything in it that your definition and understanding is superior in quality to that of everyone else? 

How about quantum mechanics which defines the very basic quality of matter as something that cannot ever be completely pinned down? How about the building blocks of what we think of as solid matter - they consist of an interaction of cells - which are neutrons and electrons whizzing around in lots of empty space?

And, is the color I see as blue really the exact same color you see? Can anyone ever know? Does it matter? Why?

What is the purpose of communication? Is it to impose a particular universal view on those with whom you are communicating? Do you really want that responsibility?

Why would you want a universe in which every living person saw the very same thing in every event/happening/locale? How boring would that be?

I like your idea about "maybe the conflicts I refer to are really failures to appreciate others perceptions."

Appreciate being the operative word.
Not convince or be convinced.


All I came up with is that it is an exhibit.  You paint to exhibit your art, not for the money and not for yourself alone.  For art to have meaning, does the artist not need to show it to others?  Long ago, artists had patrons for whom the art was done, especially portraits but only to pay the bills.  Then, the artist could paint for the public.
Likewise, I need to email because of the possibility someone might read it...
Also, craftsmanship is a component because the artist must have pride in her expression, as an author notoriously has pride of authorship because of his being pleased with the sound of his own words.  So, is any form of expression then not just "showing off"?  In modern times we even have "performance art."  "Hair" the musical, anyone?
However, please help me with the issue of external validation.  The artist is proud of the craftsmanship regardless of popular approval, right?  This is a crucial factor in my emails because I enjoy doing them even though most feedback I have ever received is negative, including the current proposals to find me a padded cell.  So, I see myself as the Vincent Van Gogh of emails; "can you 'ear me now"?


As a working artist, obviously, I want my work to be desired, to be purchased. Therefore, where is the line, when I am working, between painting for sale and painting for the sake of the painting?
Perhaps, if I am good at what I do, I will also be fortunate, and find others whose sense of beauty or passion will respond to my work. Then again, with so many of people on the planet, and such a variety of life experiences and tastes, maybe the luck involved is only a matter of 'right time, right place.

No comments:

Post a Comment