Yes I agree with those who have said art is subjective….
but it is also an easy escape to the answer…. (not that I have a better
alternative)
I want to give the subjective definition of art to the
creator not the viewer, let me try to explain
Our survival is based on being able to order our world in to
categories such as useful, dangerous, mystical and so forth…. this is an
advantage and a barrier, it is one advantage of many because it keeps us alive
it is one barrier of many because it prohibits us to develop beyond our
perceptions…. Anyway it is not this I am want to ramble on about….
My point is that even how subjective something is (and art
is maybe one of the most subjective things we have tried to define) we as humans
have a need to define ‘Art’ for us to recognise art when we see it. Some common
rules are often that ‘art hangs in galleries’, ‘art is something that provokes’
and so forth…
Art in my view is to explore your inner reality and to translate
it in to images, words, sculptors or what ever physical or non physical form it
may take that will enable people to experience the art piece with one or all of
their senses.
There is a clear problem with this definition, a magnificent
visual interpretation of say the Fjords of Norway would not be categorised as
Art according to me just because it dose not fulfil my criteria that it must be
a translation of someones inner reality… but it has to do with a problem in me. just because I can
not see that the image does not fulfil my criteria does not mean it doesn’t.
For all I know the artist may have done exactly what I think an artist must do
to create a piece of art.
Hence I think the viewer can not be allowed to cal something
Art or not it must be up to the creator to know if he has don so or not….
Therefore something is Art if the creator says so…
Like I believe an artist once said to a Journalist on the
question if something was art or not “It is art because I say so”
However the creator might have different views on what he
defines as art and if he does I will most probably disagree with him, but just
because I disagree with the Artist about if his work is art or not does not
make it leas art…. He just doesn’t fulfil my expectations, however my perception
is completely irrelevant for him… but we as humans try to keep our perceptions
closely connected so that we as a society can function. Hence the problem comes
for the artist in question when a majority or an elite agrees that what he is
making is not art. Hence it is the most common opinion that rules or the
opinion of the elite
My problem is that I’m not that fond of agreeing with the
elite or common opinion about things…
But it is already to much rambling from me…. Thank you for
killing time by reading through these louse string of thoughts…
First written: 19/07/2005 18:37