The utilitarian question is: “What’s the point of this?”
The aesthetic question is: “Is this beautiful?”
Both have their strengths and weaknesses … but I think that in general, people seem to think utilitarianism is the only way of looking at something.
And it isn’t.
…by arguing for the merits of art or media that people “just don’t get.” I love looking at something and saying, “Well, that seems really lousy,” and then digging until I figure out what it is people could love about it.
If you have any art or media that you “don’t get” or “don’t see how it’s art” or “can’t understand why people like that,” feel free to mention it (even rant a bit, if you want!) in the comments, and if I can, I’ll figure out what’s good about it and make you mad by offering a defense of said object.
That sounds fun, right?
I firmly believe in the power of fiction to uniquely tell the truth.
[Note: This is a re-post from 2010 -- but I'm still thinking about it and I'd deeply value your input, now that there are more than two people reading this blog.]
“But is it art?”
Now there’s a frustrating question. Yes! No! I have no idea! When’s lunch? As you walk through a gallery, the question, “What makes this art?” can suggest fifty answers, few of them particularly good.
Instead, let me suggest a more specific kind of question, which I think many people are trying to get at anyway. “Is this good art? Should I pay attention to this and take it seriously? How will I know great art when I see it?”
The best answer I have so far is this: “Art reveals truth. Great art reveals great truth in a great way.”
Admittedly, that’s a pretty broad definition… if asked, “What isn’t art?” I wouldn’t be able to give a long list of answers. I’d say that “not art” would be something which is not intended to reveal — like a tool built only to perform a task — or a thing which does not reveal truth — like pornography, which “reveals” a lie.
That leaves a whole lot in the “this is art” category… everything from Duchamp’s Fountain (pictured above) to Michelangelo’s Sistine Chapel. So are the Fountain and the Chapel on the same level?
Heck no.
This is where you get into what I consider to be the two meaningful questions about art:
It’s in the relationship between the kind of truth being revealed and the way in which the revelation occurs that I really find the dialogue about art to be meaningful. Duchamp’s Fountain (above) reveals the ugly truth about the pretentiousness of art galleries in an ugly way. I would call that “ugly art,” but art, nonetheless, because it connects the message and the medium and actually reveals something true.
In fact, when I think about art, I usually have in mind some kind of grid like this:
(Note: I snapped this together really fast, so please don’t take offense if your favorite artist is in the wrong place.)
If we have some kind of interpretive framework like this, then instead of saying, “I like it!” or “I don’t get it,” or “Is it art?” we can start having meaningful conversations about the kind of truth being revealed, and the quality of the revelation.
What’s interesting about this framework is that, while it assumes an objective truth — that there is truth and that some truths are more important/universal than others — it also can be used to explain why different styles of art are valued more highly in various cultures; because what people perceive as the highest truth is pushed upwards towards the top of the grid.
Anyway, this is as far as I’ve gotten in evaluating art. I would greatly appreciate any comments; I’m assuming that I’ve missed crucial philosophical points, oversimplified badly, and ignored important arguments, so I need your help to broaden my horizons.
(Or, if this is actually helpful to you, I’d love to know that too.)
I recently found an old notebook with random musings on creativity. Since this blog now serves as my more general notebook, I thought I might put some of the more interesting pages up here … this isn’t because they’re profound, just because this blog has a search feature and my notebook doesn’t.
Compassionate Creativity: Creating humbly, to serve, lead, delight, & teach the user.
Why do I so often approach creativity arrogantly, demanding my audience come to me? By opening the book, clicking the link, entering the gallery, he or she already has come towards me. Now I must go to him, and compassionately, lovingly communicate hospitality with my creative work. Create like a great grade-school teacher teaches. Create like a hostess at one of the best parties of older days. Create to supply needs, to care, to set at ease, to serve. “Whoever would be greatest among you must be the servant of all.” This holds true in creative work, too.
Who are you serving with your creative work?
The Internet is one of the most universally depressing things an artist can look at, because other people are So Stinking Good at what they do. If you see any flaws in your work (and you’re a questionable artist if you don’t), they will be magnified by a factor of twelve as you behold the awesomeness on Behance, Drawn, or other showcases of genius.
Heeere’s the solution: the “Archives” button. I love, love, love me some Kate Beaton, and break every pen within reach in surrender to the quality of her work after spending a few minutes at harkavagrant.com. But yesterday, I was exploring the archives, and made an angel-singing discovery: her first stuff wasn’t as great as what she’s doing now.
If you’re ever drawn into hero-worship and self-despair online, track back to the earliest possible work of said hero. If the record goes back far enough, you’ll see that the biggest difference between them and you is that one key factor: sticking-to-it. Keep doing what you’re doing, a little bit every day, and when you’re a super-star, be sure and point people back to your archives page.
It’s only fair.
I think that’s my new artistic aspiration.
Caught a major break today with the discovery of Jared Chapman (thanks, Drawn!). He’s part Scott C., part Kate Beaton, part Emily Carrol, and very much win.
(Those three are a breed of American* illustrators/comics artists whose work I really respond to as non-Manga, non-Herge, authentic, emotional, graphic, and clear.)
*Canada is in North America, kids.
Thinking about 3rd World Design. View larger to read my ramblings & musings.
