I think that art should not bear the burden or the responsibility of conveying the "truth". One can even argue that Truth, the absolute Truth is subjective and hard to define. How can art then certify the ultimate truth and distribute it to the public? This is a far too difficult job for something that is designed to demonstrate the beauty of humanity, the expansion of our talents as creative minds. Art should be designed to break away from truth, from the constraining shackles of reality. Art should be done to be able to evolve, and maybe deviate away from this tactile, too real world. Art is a break of the soul, a break from the everyday, and it is a break from what bothers us as human beings. What I absolutely love about art is that it is much more open to interpretation than any "truth". Truth is boring. Art is changing, evolving. Art is subjective. What I see in a painting is not what you see, and what I understand from the lines of a poem is not what you understand. Truth is here to bring conformity and a sense of belonging. However, as I said before, this is boring, too dull. Why expect something as beautiful as art to convey the same meaning to everyone, all around the world? There should be nuances to art, and I think that the job of telling the truth can be given to other subjects. History, geography and media for instance can all be responsible for telling the truth. Let art be free! Let art serve its primary purpose: to innovate and beautify this world.
I certainly agree with your statement that art must bear the burden of carrying the truth, and it is a very original take on this issue. One thing I find hard to accept is that truth is boring. Thats an over-statement and certainly not true. Truth is what rescues us from illusions, it is what guides us on the right path. Only with tangible directions can we find our own. And about it being dull and saem around the world, there we start to confuse the interpretation of art, (which always will be subjective) and the truth the artists is trying to transmit if the painting does. Hypothetically, if a painting conveys and absolute truth, which is a positive thing, then in fact the interpretation of it will be the same, spreading this absolute truth, which is also a positive thing. The media certainly does not tell the truth, and history tells us what the truth was, yet storytelling still has its flaws. Art should serve (but not only) as a transmitter of whatever message you want.
ReplyDeleteYou ignored the fact that my whole post is subjective. I still believe that truth is dull and boring, which is the "truth" for me but not for you, which I respect. You say that "history tells us what the truth was," I believe that history is one of the biggest lies. History, as we all know, is written by the victors. This is why it does not hold much "truth" to me. Don't you think it is why we have so many interpretations in history? As you said, storytelling is flawed, always used to the storyteller's advantage. In this case the storyteller is most of the time the victor.
DeleteBut what about Impressionism? What about Realism? I think your statements are perfectly legitimate in terms of surrealist art, but I also think that Art can be a means of conveying Truth, and that this Truth is not necessarily a burden. In the case of Impressionism, I believe the artist is trying to paint the history of humanity in a natural and quotidian way so as to be able to capture that moment in history and the essence of life in that time period. But they are also trying to capture timeless themes and feelings in their art, like happiness/sadness/depression/passion/love. These human feelings ARE our truth. The same goes with realism, I suppose.
ReplyDeleteAs for Art changing & evolving, I certainly agree with you, but I also believe that Art is fundamentally a means of leaving a legacy, leaving an imprint on society before we depart this life. Art is about history, and about the patterns of humanity. There is much truth to be obtained from the themes repeated in art from different time periods!
I agree with your specific references to Art throughout the centuries. However, I did mention that Art progresses, which you took into account. I meant that art becomes a different medium and way of communication as time goes on. I still think that the "truth" of Impressionism and Realism is a subjective one. These art forms do convey the singular truth of artists following the same style/ movement. They still transmit some facts, I agree. Yet, they add their own subjective touch. The colors and how bright/dull they are might mean something, the small portion of the image that they concentrated on might have bias and subjectivity to them as well. So, my stand is still the same. Truth is subjective to every single person, especially artists.
DeleteI agree with you Mariam. Art can definitely hold truth about many things from people's lives and portray it in several forms of art. Art is a way of expression and from the very beginning humans have used art to express their feelings as well as the truth about their lives. This brings me back to my point which stresses the fact that artists have effect on their piece of art. There is always some truth in the piece of art about the artists interests, passions, and preferences. Artists use art to express their need. For instance, literature is a form of art that artists use in their need to create fiction or non-fiction. I want to talk specifically about fiction. Writers write because they feel the need to imagine and speculate and feel what other people might want to feel. It gives them the opportunity to travel and wonder. Readers on the other hand, choose the fiction that corresponds to their need as well to speculate, dream and live lives that they might never have the chance to live. Art is very subjective and personal for the producer and the consumer. We all produce and admire the art that speaks to us, challenges us or makes us wonder. This all goes back to the idea that Art must hold some truth about the artists and here on a new note I just figured out that art holds a truth also about the person that discusses it, admires it or challenges it.
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting that you mentioned fiction. Fiction speaks so much to me and holds so much truth to me, although it is the pure imagination of an author. I actually prefer fiction to non-fiction, which usually is less imaginative and creative. I like to evade with the author and delve in their special world. So, fiction, even if it is "untrue" can hold so much truth to some readers and to the author.
ReplyDeleteI believe that there is no sole mission of art. It depends on the artist-whether he wants to portray the reality or the supernatural. There are afterall different art types. Even in literature there is realism, romanticism and many others. I don't think truth is boring either, but that is just a minor difference of opinion. Since art is subjective, it is as much valid for you to hold that opinion as for me to say that I disagree with yours.
ReplyDeleteGood discussion... ;-)
ReplyDelete