Jump to content

blogs_blog_153

  • entries
    333
  • comments
    1,154
  • views
    93,736

The Case Against Art


BCii

516 views

More depressing philosophy. =D

 

Though art is not fundamentally concerned with beauty, its inability to rival nature sensuously has evoked many unfavorable comparisons. “Moonlight is sculpture,” wrote Hawthorne; Shelley praised the “unpremeditated art” of the skylark; Verlaine pronounced the sea more beautiful than all the cathedrals. And so on, with sunsets, snowflakes, flowers, etc., beyond the symbolic products of art. Jean Arp, in fact, termed “the most perfect picture” nothing more than “warty, threadbare approximation, a dry porridge.”

 

Why then would one respond positively to art? As compensation and palliative, because our relationship to nature and life is so deficient and disallows an authentic one. As Motherlant put it, “One gives to one’s art what one has not been capable of giving to one’s own existence.” It is true for artist and audience alike; art [...] arises from unsatisfied desire.

 

[To quote] Nietzsche’s aphorism, “We have Art in order not to perish of Truth.” Its consolation explains the widespread preference for metaphor over a direct relationship to the genuine article. If pleasure were somehow released from every restraint, the result would be the antithesis of art. In dominated life freedom does not exist outside art, however, and so even a tiny, deformed fraction of the riches of being is welcomed. “I create in order not to cry,” revealed Klee.

I've often found myself thinking along similar lines, how profoundly inadequate are our symbolic modes of expression, i.e. language and art, when compared to the naturally occurring, genuine, living article they attempt to define and represent.

 

The symbol ought not to be preferred over the true presence and direct experience of that which it represents, of which it is the merest shadow.

 

The map ought not to be mistaken for the path itself.

 

Art = artifice = artificial.

 

And such like thoughts.

 

You know, I feel there is something horribly sterile about all art. Some quality which I can only describe as "dead." And the best reason we have for loving art is the fact of the truths we are attempting to approach through it.

 

 

 

Now I'm left wondering if I can possibly alienate my readership more than I just did. :P

 

little-heart.png

6 Comments


Recommended Comments

The way I see it, nature was created by something greater than us, and since we're only human we can never reflect nature perfectly. I do prefer photography to paintings and whatnot, but even that lacks the sort of ongoing, 3D nature of nature.
Link to comment

It is for this reason (and laziness) that my love of photography faded. I used to adore taking pictures of stuff--until it occurred to me that taking pictures is just another way that we as humans attempt to create something everlasting--instead of just enjoying the moment

 

I have seen a great many beautiful moments, I will experience more. I do not need to create some false 'eternal' memory of them.

 

-Janus

Link to comment

"We've found this way to vent our images that prevents us from killing ourselves and others, and that's it." -Lynda Barry

 

Maybe not the point, but it's worked for me.

Link to comment
The way I see it, nature was created by something greater than us, and since we're only human we can never reflect nature perfectly. I do prefer photography to paintings and whatnot, but even that lacks the sort of ongoing, 3D nature of nature.

Mmm. What is, versus the image of what is. Nature is perfect as it is -- unpleasant bits included. To try to echo it, to add anything to it or take anything away, is ultimately unnecessary.

 

It is for this reason (and laziness) that my love of photography faded. I used to adore taking pictures of stuff--until it occurred to me that taking pictures is just another way that we as humans attempt to create something everlasting--instead of just enjoying the moment.

 

I have seen a great many beautiful moments, I will experience more. I do not need to create some false 'eternal' memory of them.

 

-Janus

I have the same attitude toward moments of awesome beauty. It's so much more fulfilling to experience such a moment directly, unmediated, and to drink it all in, than to try to "capture" it for posterity. That very act takes one away from the moment and amounts to cheating oneself of its fullness..

 

You speak truth.

 

"If people could put rainbows in zoos, they'd do it."

 

"We've found this way to vent our images that prevents us from killing ourselves and others, and that's it." -Lynda Barry

 

Maybe not the point, but it's worked for me.

Yes. I see that as tying into the "unfulfilled desire" justification. Art obviously serves a profound purpose in our fractured human psyche. I think if we were really whole, we'd eventually stop needing it.

 

 

 

 

 

For anyone whom this offends, I assure you 100% I am not attacking artists or saying art is "bad." Heck, as xccj alluded to, I consider myself an artist in my own way. I am at peace with that fact. I accept that I'm not whole, that I have unfulfilled desires, that I'm as imperfect as anyone else. The point of this entry was to muse upon what the ideal would be.

 

little-heart.png

Link to comment
Guest
Add a comment...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...