Art is the identity of a society. It lends the space for beauty, clarity, philosophy, sociology, objective for existence. A life without Art is extremely horrifying…. without art there is vaccuum. The vaccuum created by lack of art is humongous. Art must create, not destroy.
Art should strive to show good, nice things, in a pleasing, aesthetic manner to improve the lives, not package, glamourise and glorify bad or evil or corrupt or villainy in the name of highlighting realism in an exaggerated manner, purely because one believes art must exaggerate, to bring attention to the darker aspects of life. Art has the space to accommodate showing those inevitable other side called suffering, not as a tool to shock or titillate, since neither stand the test of time, but to sensitize. The tools towards that are simile, metaphor, symbolism, aesthetic subversion… Instead if mere unimaginative replication of life’s stark reality is presented, that is manifest impoverishment. When that happens on the stage or canvas, that art is a tumour. Cinema has already been deeply, incurably, terminally infected with this tumor, this tuberculosis.
Should art not show realism or exagerrate to draw attention to the maladies of the age and culture? Yes, but without compromising on the aesthetics. Art is necessary indulgence. Society can afford to indulge in art only after bare minimal necessities of life have been met.
Have you met anyone who doesn’t have food, shelter or clothing secured spend time on art? Art comes in leisure, when there is time to spare. When there’s no time to spare, to indulge in relaxation without having to think about the next meal, the holes in clothing or no roof above, there can be no art. Such is the secondary nature of art. At that stage, it is spare time, luxury, entertainment. Its primary mission is to entertain, help pass time.
The process of Art should be to bring calm and peace to the mind by relaxing the senses. It should provide a smooth flight on the magic carpet of aesthetics, not be a cause for turbulences and jolts. Having lulled the travellers into smooth flight, its process can provide in-flight edification in such underlying manner as intelligent comedies do, that when the traveller disembarks the journey of leisure, they take home proactivity as a matter of course, not as heavy excess baggage to be discarded, upon hearing about the extra cess to be paid. Not trundle or trudge off heavily, muttering and cursing the discomfort of journey undertook. Then the tumour inside becomes manifest pustule. Consequently, it follows, that it is time to destroy. That art is destructive that indulges in and encourages such tendencies. We’d only have Nietzsches proclaiming Art is Dead! Like a gargoyle that at first sight draws one into admiring its artistic appearance, art should gently ease the experiencer into responding to the realities it hides behind the beauty.
Art should be like a rat trap, as Dürrenmatt said. Fascinate, lure, trap, entertain, make you think… of a way out! To make the audience Respond, not React. That should be the purpose. To those who claim that reaction is a form of response, well, sorry… but not sorry… do learn language first, before indulgences. Then… perhaps read Rabelais. And some more that opens our perspectives up. Not those that drown our intellect into anaesthetic sensational experiences.
The rest, as they say, is thanks.
– 22 September, 2023, Friday
- originally conceived sometime around World Theatre Day 2023. It's been growing 6 months. Finally here it is.
2 comments:
We find ourselves in a society that lives in a constant cycle of exhaustion. Where most don’t seek out good art but prefer to sit back and relax while an algorithm seeks out the supposedly appropriate art for them. In this context, whatever art we experience is at the mercy of the platforms that provide them to us. With this being the future of art, would it ever be possible to control the quality of art on display?. As for the consumers, are they to blame if they can’t recognize the garbage being shoveled to them in the guise of art?
Audience are only as intelligent or as dumb as the local artist community. Therefore, artists cannot, must not dumb them further down by providing what easily regales them or please them to make commercial sense alone. Eventually, this is why the responsibility of artists to provide elevating art consciously arises. Agreed, non-populist, class art that can bring refinement to the sensibility of the mass audience, consequently, will always be time-consuming to put together, and therefore less in volume compared to consumable entertainment. Also, as the quantum of people who churn out consumable populist art forms is high, one needs to make a conscious choice. There's now the need to combat the rampant AI too. Thus, the onus is squarely on the artists. Thanks for the response to OP.
Post a Comment