Understanding of the Nature of Art and Articulation of a Personal Theory of Art
In order to understand the nature of art, you must first ask yourself some questions regarding art. “What is art”, is the questions that is asked the most throughout universities and in the studies of aestheticians. “What is art for”, both personally and societally is a questions that needs to be asked of every student and every artist. “What does art do” is on a similar track, but is taking a look at art from a future perspective. We can study art history to see what art has done in the past and then predict what it will do in the future. Following this vein it is important to understand where art has come from, what its background is and who creates it. Therefore it is important to not only ask these questions of art, but of the artist as well. What is an artist? What is an artist for? What do artists do?
Many artists, writers and philosophers have postulated the question, “What is art,” the philosophical area of aesthetics is centered around answering that very question. Will the definition emboldened future generations of artists or effectually stall their artistic growth? Or does the very definition of something so alive and growing make itself obsolete with each passing day? The most simple definition for art is
"the use of skill and imagination in the creation of aesthetic objects, environments, or experiences that can be shared with others" (Britannica Online)
This however is too broad a definition for many people, especially artists. As a collective whole, artists want to be considered as a special group, their own species almost. According to Britannica online, anyone could be an artist as long as they created and shared, and art would be anything created with imagination. If everyone considered themselves artists, we would not need a definition. It is the notion of being unattainable, unfathomable, or somehow exclusive that has created the unique appeal of art and artists. Some people spend their entire lives trying to break into the arena that is art only to be accepted after death. Others seem to glide effortlessly through the golden gate of aesthetics and artistic reason, others flounder in anonymity forever. Who are the true artists in this world, in the past, in the present, how will we know them in the future. There are so many different factors that have to be taken into consideration in these questions, especially in today's society where the presence of big business and the influence of government on the arts creates a controlling factor that was not as prevalent in the past. “Propaganda art” which has become ever present makes it more and more difficult to recognize not only the artist but the art as well.
What is wrong with art supported by the government or big business you might ask. In some cases, nothing. The government should support art and contribute to it, but it should not hold influence over the artist or the artwork. When outside non-artists enter into the creative realm, be it as financial supporter, critic, or as commissioner of art, the work will become influenced and controlled by this authority figure. Big business would be worse, as they would only hire an artist to do exactly what they want done. Though the work may be beautiful and technically sound, it is so steeped in advertisement and promulgation it has lost all artistic merit.
Maybe the questions that should be asked here is what does art do to the artist and how is the artist different from non-artist? Ayn Rand wrote:
By a selective recreation, art isolates and integrates those aspects of reality which represent man's fundamental view of himself and existence. Out of the countless numbers of concretes — of single, disorganized and (seemingly) contradictory attributes, actions, and entities — an artist isolates the things which he regards as metaphysically essential and integrates them into a single new concrete that represents an embodied abstraction. (Rand 1975, 19-20)
A concept is a mental integration of two or more units which are isolated according to a specific characteristic(s) and united by a specific definition…. The act of isolation involved is a process of abstraction: i.e., a selective mental focus that takes out or separates a certain aspect of reality from all others…. The uniting involved is not a mere sum, but an integration, i.e., a blending of the units into a single, new mental entity which is used thereafter as a single unit of thought. (Rand 1990, 10)
If this is true, the artist is more influenced by his art, than his art is influenced by him. He is more of a channeler, a conductive artistic unit which allows the thoughts, once put into abstracted cohesive form, to flow freely out of himself. In this way, art is much like a dream. A collection of thoughts and images put together in order to provide a certain amount of release needed by the human body. Art affects the artist, much the same way dreams affect the sleeper. Here is where we find the elusive aspect of the artist. The same way not all people can be geniuses, because they do not contain within themselves the abilities to do so, not everyone can be a true artist. If we hold with Ayn Rands theory, and my own personal interpretation of it, then the true artist must have within himself the cognitive and physical ability to gather information, form it into creation of some sort, and release it on the world. No talk of skill or technique, only the simple raw power that comes from expression. This rawness of pure expression is how we single out the “real” art from the propaganda, big business, government controlled art and artists. Art with an agenda for corporations or government is not art. This negates much of what we have called art in the past however. Da Vinci painted for the church, does this make his art less, or not art. No, because the definition of art changes with every time period, every day even. That is why is important to look to the past. Understanding where art comes from gives us a grounding for what it is to us now. Art has changed through out time, with every new genre and style. There was a time in which visual art was not considered part of the arts.
When looking at art from an anthropological stance you see that art has derived itself from the human need for decorative accents in their surroundings and the need to relay messages to one another. According to Duane Preble
“Art is something done so well that it takes on more than ordinary significance.”
Assuming both of these are true, art would then fall into two categories, work by skilled craftsmen meant to enhance the aesthetic qualities of objects and environment, and work by notable commincationists that relay an important message in a very masterful way. Which also separates the artists into two categories of “craftsman” and “artist.”
Parsons and Blocker suggest in Aesthetics and Education that "At any given time, there are limits to what can be considered art; an artist creates something that exceeds these limits in a particular way and claims it is art; usually by exhibiting it as if it were art and often with an argument about why it is art; the work is considerably discussed and eventually either accepted or rejected as an artwork. In this way the boundaries of art have been continually widened."
Taking their point of view into consideration, we now realize why pre-rennaisance artists were not considered artists during their own time, but are considered artists in ours. As time goes by and people and society change the definition for not only art, but for artist changes as well. This brings up another question. Can a craftsman be an artist? So far we know that true art is an elusive act that effects the artist much the same way dreams affect people and for it to be true, it must not be propaganda art. We know that art is done with imagination and shared, and that it is done so well, it becomes more than it is. If the craftsmen creates a piece that does in fact complete all the requirements for art just stated, and it is exhibited as if it were art and accepted, then yes, the craftsmen has become artist.
But this, yet again, brings up another question. What is “exhibiting as if it were art” and who “discusses and accepts.” The majority of people would consider the traditional gallery the only real place to display art, and art historians, aestheticians and critics as the people who discuss. This however conflicts, many times with our notion of true art not being supported by big business or government. Critics, work for the businesses, Galleries are often owned by the government and big business. Art historians, typically, want artworks to fall into preconceived artistic arenas. Areas that they know and understand. Our only hope for genuine open minded discussion on any new art form would almost certainly have to come from aestheticians. Where to exhibit though? Small privately owned galleries? On the street? Possibly. If part of our definition of art is to share the art with someone, wouldn’t it be better to share it with as many people as possible? Showing work on the streets in some way would be more authentic, as a true artist, than showing in any large gallery.
Art and artist, then, are part of a natural process, affecting the artist, much the same way dreams do, and which she then skillfully and in a way which makes the art become More than itself, creates something that is not backed by big business, or the government and is shown in an open location such as the streets. Once the object in question has been discussed and agreed upon by aestheticians, it can become art. This, of course, is ridiculous in many ways. It does however illustrate the lengths at which artists go in order to define what art is and what an artist is in order to reinforce themselves as artist.
What is art for? What is the artist for?As stated earlier, art throughout the years has been created for two main reasons. To add decorative elements to the world around and to express some idea or concept. We have ruled out decorative elements as craftsmanship and not artistry, unless if expresses something. Only then can it begin to be art. Peter Saint-Andre puts it best,
“…images in other art-forms and genres present what it is like to perform an action or live through an experience, what the world would be like if a certain course of events occurred, what it feels like to experience a certain emotion, and so on.”
So the purpose of art, is to relay the abstract ideas, that we gather into our minds and release through our art, visually through some media. This does not mean art must be abstract, rather it is a visual representation of an abstract idea. The artist, yet again, becomes the conduit for creating meaning and expression in such a way as was impossible before. Klimts work, “The Kiss” would be visual representation of how it feels to him to kiss someone. It is also the actual representation of a kiss. Following these lines, nonobjective abstract art would be considered the actual representation of a abstract idea. Rothko’s paintings are not his visual representation of how he feels about something, but how he feels the abstract idea physically looks. In this way art becomes more abstract, even objective art. The visual representation of people and places in art becomes it’s own abstract concept. Not just a kiss, but the way a kiss feels, the idea of a kiss. The abstract works become more concrete, not the idea of pain, but what pain looks like, what anger looks like. In this way, art becomes far more meaningful. What seems to be a simple portrait can become so much more in terms of abstract ideas and thoughts. Art and the artist serve a very important role here, creating a universal language that can be shared, regardless of speech.
Not only is it creating a universal language, but it is creating an experience between two people. An intercourse is spawned between the creator of the work and the person viewing. A connection has been made that did not exist before, no matter how fleeting. This is the importance of showing art. If art is kept locked away in an attic or store room it is not procreating and is no longer viable. THe transmitting of ideas must continue in order for art and artist alike to do what they muct do. Tolstoy puts it best.
And it is upon this capacity of man to receive another man's expression of feeling and experience those feelings himself, that the activity of art is based.
To “get across” an emotion, an ideas, and abstract thought through some means created by man. To enlighten and enliven the viewers. In the best scenarios the connection becomes palpable and the viewer walks away distincly changed in some way. This is what art is for.
What does art do? What does the artist do? Art and artist express, communicate and enlighten. That is what art has been done in the past, for millions of years,beginning with the nomads and their cave drawings and going though all the periods and eras right up to today. But this brings up another question for me… Why? Why do we feel the need to express these abstract concepts and ideas in some form other than the normal spoken language. Why must we impress upon the world our unique vision?
what a work of art presents is something that is personally important to the artist. Naturally, what is important to the human being who creates a work of art may be something philosophical, and the work may "express his vision of the relation between man and nature" (Bronowski 1977, 69). But at the same time it may be something as simple as the artist's appreciation for a scene or a person, or even the artist's joy in the sensuous materials of a certain art-form (as painters are often said to take light and color as their subject-matter). Thus a poem about a flower or a child embodies first and foremost the poet's thoughts about the flower or the child, and may or may not sustain any kind of broader interpretation. Robert Frost expressed this well when he wrote that a poem (and by implication every work of art) "ends in a clarification of life — not necessarily a great clarification, such as sects and cults are founded on, but in a momentary stay against confusion" (Frost 1973, 126). -Peter Saint-Andrew
We create because it is important to us, and if the earlier arguments are correct, because we need the release of purging these ideas from ourselves. If it is important to us, then it must be important to someone else. Therefore it should be seen. Once it is out of us, outside in the world it can fulfill it’s own purpose and express the ideas, concepts, or whatever it is that this work was meant to do.
The most sincere form of art is street art. It fits into every category, it is one of the few true forms of art left, it is not corporate sponsored, it is created from the ideas of the artist, it is created because the artist wants to create it, and it expresses and communicates. We are in a time in which the art world has become so over run with theories that we have kicked our own selves out of the galleries and watch as art becomes less and less of what it was. The communication, the expression, the trueness. We are over run with craftsmen claiming to be artists and businesses saying their advertisements are art. We have exhiled ourselves to the streets.
Art changes the nature of art. In it’s conception, it is already changing the face and nature of art in some way, as is the artist. What is art? What is art for? What does art do? It changes, it expresses, it is communication, art is human, art is people, art is the individual, the one who made it, the one who views it. Art is creation, it is ideas, it is abstract in more ways than one. It does not have to be viewed in a gallery, or discussed by critics. It does not have to be taught in the classroom or paid for by school loans. Art is that nagging feeling inside that you just want to make something and show everyone. The nature of art is in the spray can.
My art practice is an intimate act in which I seduce my subject into becoming many different mediums. I carry it across the threshold of disciplines, inviting the discreet and verbose in turn to add their own unique flavor to the private act of creation. The sensual process is more important than the final climax, as I learn more during than after.
things I need to do for my art practice
For the development of my own art practice. One in which I learn to do what I want rather than assignments. These are some of my ideas, they need to be organized better, that's part of what I'm doing.
1. Need to reduce stress
Toward this step I have removed one source of stress from my life, a house mate. I am also looking for a different job, closer to home. My boyfriend has agreed to take the kids once a week and leave me alone so that I can have some time to myself.
2. A system for cataloging my art ideas so that I will understand what I am talking about and be able to use them anywhere anytime… probably will be this page but I need more specifics.
3. A space to work. I have a space if I am working on digital stuff, but painting, sculpture, that kind of thing my only space is the carport which is open air and it gets a little cold and rainy out there at times. That space will do for now, but I have a long term goal of finding a house in the area that has an extra room for my studio.
4. Improve my technical skills, or rather try to practice, not gonna say daily, but definitely try to practice regularly. I need to be aware of my inability to work on a schedule.
5. List things that are important to me, things I want to make statements on or open up discussions on, they don't have to be actual art ideas, but just ideas.
I have a Back Packit account which allows me to create lists and modify. I am using it as a way to keep track of any ideas that I come up with so that I can go back and look at them later and hopefully still know what they mean.
I have a painting area set-up as well as time to work now.
I am working almost daily on my technical drawing skills. I did a lot of cartoon drawing this semester, I'm trying to make sure I balance it out with some realistic drawing as well.
Even thought the semester is over I am not stopping on the dark mind project. I want to make it better. I think above all else, that is art. To keep working on something, even though you don't have to.
