On Art and the Creation and Appreciation of it

While on a trip to the local state museum my wife remarked that she simply ‘did not get’ art. In my experience, this is anything but uncommon in today’s world. As a people we are so irrevocably anchored in the concrete concerns of day to day life that we don’t often take time to look at things on a more abstract level. In all honesty, this is probably exactly what the forces of evolution intended. If primitive man was lost forever in the appreciation of ‘that beautiful flower’ he would no doubt find himself someone’s lunch rather quickly.

Many seem to have the idea that only the ‘intelligent’ can appreciate art and those who don’t appreciate it are simply feeble minded. This is frankly balderdash as my wife is exceptionally intelligent but the simple fact is that she has no experience with art and doesn’t have a particularly artistic nature, at least in the classical sense of the word. I think the real problem is that she, and many others, simply don’t know what to expect. It’s always amusing to me that she will say ‘I don’t get this’ but will also state that she’s repulsed by it. This visceral and non-concrete reaction is what’s supposed to happen. Rather than allowing her emotions to interpret what she’s seeing, she instead tries to use reason to decode it. Most of art is not susceptible to such forms of analysis.

I said above that my wife is not of an ‘artistic’ nature in the classical sense but clearly her artistic energies are merely differently expressed. Her medium is not oils or stone or clay but instead the interior of our home. I think the art of everyday esthetics is vastly under appreciated in our culture.

As for myself, I’m no more an expert at art than my wife though perhaps more likely to ‘let go’ and see beyond the literal. A friend of mine does art in a purely digital medium and has generated a small gallery of images:http://www.geocities.com/ceaudritsh/gallery.html

In each of these images can be seen a vague impression of something, though it’s very open to debate what that actually is. I’m relatively convinced that this is entirely his intent. I’ll admit that none of these really evokes any great emotion from me with the exception of his submission on 8/30/04.

Firstly, it’s an utter and complete contradiction. Large, apparently stone, objects are floating happily among the clouds. The use of color is also powerful to further suggest a world much like our own but still wholly different in some key way. Mind bogglingly, I’ve found myself actually imagining this picture at random points throughout the day. Each time the image becomes slightly modified: details are added to the floating objects, clouds rearranged, etc. The actually physical image is not stored in my memory but the internal impression is etched permanently in my recollection.

Charlie’s interpretation of this particular work is an apocalyptic one. Presumably he’s seeing large threatening objects looming over us waiting to stab down into the planet. I don’t see that at all. Instead I see mankind and his works interceding hard and sterile into the realm of nature. This difference between the observer and the observed is what art is really about.