Art takes two. Everyone is making art. You probably made art today without even knowing it. This is reflecting upon Marcel Duchamp’s written work, The Creative Act. It articulates how the art process is not created and completed by the artist alone, but the spectator assists by qualifying the art which completes the creative act. Therefore, art takes two.
The spectator determines the social value of the artist’s work. If artwork is not considered valuable to society, then it is just considered bad art, but it is still art. In light of this, we must consider what is believed to be art today. The definition of art is broad. It could be a movie on the big screen or make-up on a face. It can be both big or small, known or unknown. It seems anyone has the potential to be an artist and since Duchamp believes the spectator to contribute to art by viewing it, then everyone actually is an artist by these standards. In my mind, the qualifications of an artist are different.
I believe that art is independent from every idea, memory, or association with the artist’s existence. It is an invention of something that is not yet known. A general notion of our society is that everything has already been invented and we as humans are just recyclers of the past. We are re-inventors. We take what is in the world and modify it, or re-invent it, as a new idea. However, it is not a new idea, but an idea that has been influenced by the ideas of others. The idea only exists because we are continually looking into the past for answers. What if we forgot about the past and erased everything from our memories? We would all be innovators. However, we cannot erase it or not be influenced by our experiences. Since I cannot erase these influences, I try to disconnect myself from everything I know and open my mind. I discovered that to think independently means to think without any limitations. An open mind cannot be restricted to guidelines. A child is taught that coloring in the lines is good and socially excepted, but when we take away those limitations and personal intentions, then the possibility of an artistic moment might occur. If a person wants to experience something outside of what he knows, he must disconnect himself from everything but the idea. It is dangerous work to be a real artist.
I have viewed the work of several visual productions this month and although I enjoyed them, I don’t believe their works are art. My beliefs do not make them unsuccessful or diminish the accomplishments of their ideas. For example, Charles Burnett’s work, Killing of Sheep 1979, is designed with his viewer in mind. Burnett films African American life in the ghetto, leaving most of the film open ended with little unity. Brunett used the influence of his experience to capture moments of African American life. Paul Chan’s Waiting for Godot in New Orleans is another example, but he uses surroundings to educate and inform an audience. Although both works are beautiful and creative, I don’t consider them art because their ideas are based on past experiences.
Robert Schaller is what I believe to be closer to an artist then most. I plan to attend a week long field trip with Schaller this July. He will take individuals into the Colorado wilderness who are interested in finding artistic moments. He has created several pieces of film from similar excursions where he let himself become available to independent thought. The work he does mirrors independent thought and art. I have never seen film emulsion before being introduced to Schaller. After screening some of his work at a public event there was a discussion. He said what he likes about making hand made film is that you never have complete control. I feel this is exactly what an artist should embrace, because art is unpredictable. It cannot be leashed.
Contrary to general American belief, once a spectator sees a piece of art, it is destroyed. The creative act begins and ends with the artist. What the spectators see is whatever they want; it is completely separate from what the piece of art is. The spectator ruins art. They project there own understanding. They place conditions. The artist should not be concerned with expressing his or her idea to the spectator while developing it, because if it is true art, there can be no expectation. It cannot be compared or valued by anyone but the artist. The artist can’t control what art is or isn’t. They are at the mercy of individual enlightenment.
All in all, art is the death. The artist must be willing to give up normalcy in the world to reach a place were an idea is free, true, and pure. There is a romantic idea of the type of life an artist leads, but the reality of a true artist’s life is to be considered odd, freakish, and crazy. Would you cut of your ear to express your idea? Would you create and speak a language that is not considered a language? Could you emotionally cope with people continually pointing at you, persecuting you, calling you crazy? Could you sacrifice your social life on earth to create art? A single perspective can’t be harnessed to art, and the domino effect or chain reaction or circle of life does not embody art. Art is everything separate from that. It is independent of everyone except the artist, and that’s why the creative act begins and ends with the artist.
No comments:
Post a Comment