January 8, 2007
-
works of art
Be forewarned. What I am about to say may seem a little on the cynical side at first.
There are two basic takes on the motivations that drive the creation of works of art.
The first is that we create them because we have something *important*
to say to the world through our art. In one sense the artist is trying
to change the world or change individuals perspective on reality by
enlightening them in some way. The mode of change need not be direct.
The artist finds satisfaction if the viewers vision of the world is
shifted or their understanding of some aspect of reality is increased.
In this way the artist sees their work as causing substantive change.
They see this as putting their mark on the world, as justifying their
existence and of leaving something behind that makes their existence
meaningful.But does it really? Think of all the multitude of works of creativity
that saturate the world these days. The shear number of stories and
images and ideas that permeate reality is beyond the scope that the
mind can comprehend. Each one a unique work of art by a unique
individual presenting a unique perspective and appealing to a unique
audience? Can that really be true? I have no doubt that each artwork is
at least a little bit different from each other. Nobody can share the
unique experiences of another individual exactly. Nevertheless,
whatever one’s message is, chances are pretty good that someone
somewhere has presented it before. Maybe your work will sync more with
a few people than those other works but its unlikely that your work
will be any kind of a world changing event. Chances are not that many
people will be effected and the ways in which they are effected are
probably not that meaningful. It’s just not necessarily a big deal to
create a piece of art.Here’s another way to think about it. Look back upon all of the works
of art you’ve experienced. How many can you say have fundamentally
changed your perspecive? How many have caused in you a radical shift in
behavior? How many can you say honestly that if you had not seen this
you’d be a different person, be living a different life, have different
wants and fears and values? For some, there are some works that hold
such a special place, but not a whole lot and many times when we say
that a work is that significant to us, we are really projecting our
wants over the reality of the situation. We found the work beautiful or
meaningful or truthful and we liked it enough that we wish we would
behave differently as a result. But it’s rare that we do so, at least
not primarily because we perceived this art. Eliminate the work of art
from our lives and chances are pretty good we’d be doing exactly what
we are doing now. The catalysts for change of life tend to be
conglomerates of experiences. The sum total of the arts we perceived no
doubt have an impact on our lives. If a person loves works of fantasy
and you eliminate all the fantasy stories that person has perceived
from their life and without a doubt you’ll find a different person, who
lives and thinks differently, but take away one particular fantasy
story and you just don’t get that much of a difference. Indeed
examination of lives tends to show that particular interactions with
individuals even single brief conversations can have a much more
profound impact on what kinds of decisions a person makes than dozens
of perceived stories. So chances are good an artist isn’t going to
change the world to any large extent unless they have some super power
that manifests itself in their works. Oh there are undoubtedly
exceptions. There are probably some very small few works of art that
have radically changed the course of entire societies. What would the
world really be like if there had never been Shakespeare? Who can say.
But these cases are in the margin, not the mainstream.What’s worse is the long term perspective of such a motivation. If you
desire to create a work of art so that you can leave your permanent
mark upon society, if you could skip ahead a couple thousand years
there’s almost no chance whatsoever even an echo of an echo of your
work’s impact will remain even if it were the most famous of artworks
of its day. This is the terrifying aspect of time. It simply drives all
things into nothing and not even the most powerful of works can prevent
its impact. Society tries to preserve. It’s one of the great aspects of
human endeavor, but can we even say how well were are succeeding in
preserving the relics of the past? Would Homer even recognize the
Illiad that students are reading today? Would the discussions being had
about it even make any coherent sense to him? Maybe those books are
still having an impact, but there is almost no way to know that the
impact is as was intended. Maybe Homer would be satisfied if it was
having any impact at all after so many years, but I should think that
would be a little irrational. If a work survives millennium only to be
the cause of the destruction of the Universe at the end of the
millennium surely this would not be a thing to be happy about. In any
case, one day the universe will either expand to the point that we all
freeze or re-contract destroying all that exists. In the end no matter
what happens the confines of reality as we understand it seem to
suggest that all works of art can only have limited finite
significance. So too with all things. Nothing lasts forever.I don’t mean to criticize the artist who dreams of such significance in
their works but only to make observation of the reality of the
situation. I would recommend that an artist not take radical world
shifting or permanent lasting impact as their only motivation for
creating their works of art. Now if your are sufficiently motivated by
the thought of having just a small group of people are ever so slightly
influenced by your works, well then that’s another matter. You will, in
that case, likely meet your goals with your works and maybe even exceed
your expectations. The world will be a different place due to your
works, just not all that different.On the other side of the coin there is the idea of the internal
motivation. Once someone said to me something like this: “It is not
that I want to write but that I have to write.” The idea is that the
artist of all kinds is internally driven. That they *need* to create
their work. Or that they could not imagine an existence wherein they do
not create.The idea is over dramatic. I simply have seen no evidence of anyone
truly suffering from not choosing to create works of art? You will not
die if you do not create. You will not cease unless you choose too. Now
that people have feel deep dissatisfaction, discomfort, or even
emotional pain because they lack an outlet to express themselves of the
truth of that I have no doubt. I simply suspect that there are a lot of
ways in which to satisfy that need or even remove its significance from
their life and deaden its ability to hurt you. I believe a person who
feels this way is not hard-wired to feel this way. I suspect that
humanity is not split into those with the Artist-switch set to on and
those who do not. I could be wrong, but it seems more likely to me that
the motivation to be an artist for self fulfillment probably comes more
from environmental influences on ones life rather than it being
anyone’s inherent nature. And so, I suspect truly that this can be
changed with a simple matter of will. And yes I know that there aren’t
really any simple matters of will and that matters of will are pretty
much the hardest things in the world but nevertheless they are within
the realms of the possible for beings who are possessed of free will.Even more direct though, I think a lot of people say things like this
as a means of self-justification after the fact. It’s sort of like
“Yes, I probably could have been doing X,Y,or Z which I intellectually
believe would be a more meaningful or safer or wiser expenditure of my
life, but I couldn’t. I simply *had* to be an Artist.” To which I say:
Bull! You could have as easily done X, Y, or Z and lived with the
discomfort of not being able to express yourself artistically or
snatching what little tidbits of artistic expression here and there as
you could. Devoting a substantive portion of one’s life to the arts is
a choice we make like any other. I think, it diminishes it to try and
make it seem as a fore-ordained matter beyond our control. It
diminishes us to say that we are so constrained in our possibilities.So if not that, then what value does lie inherent in the act of
artistry that makes it a worthy choice? I’ve already said that the
works of art won’t last, probably won’t be that influential, and aren’t essential to our existence. So why exactly should anyone engage in creating works of art?For the simplest reason in the world. Because we want to. Art is a
chosen act of self-expression. Perhaps we choose to express something
in particular because we enjoy the expression, perhaps because we feel
better after we express it, or perhaps because expressing it alleviates
us of a mental burden, or we find that it provides a distraction from
other aspects of life, or because we like to see what it is that we are
capable of. It doesn’t really matter the individual “why’s”, the
primary reason we act in this is to satisfy our basic desires. And,
like all wants, we satisfy it by acting upon in first and then we
afterwards come to try to grasp an understanding of why we wanted it in
the first place. Unlike many wants, I think the want for artistic
expression is actually quite a productive want. Unlike say wanting
good tasting food for example which can often lead us to irrational
acts that are to our detriment and sometimes even to the detriment of
society, wanting to express ourselves artistically causes the
manifestation of a little piece of our consciousness that others can
experience, sometimes find useful, and very often learn something from.
Furthermore it benefits us individually as well. There’s the direct
benefit when a society is structured to provide advantages to creators
of works of art sure, but more significantly there’s the emotional
benefits and peace of mind that self expression can bring that I have
alluded to earlier. Often, creative acts help a person to connect to
the world, to feel more a part of humanity or at least understand
better their differences from others and accept them. And on top of that, if you are lucky you may find fame or glory or you may change the world for the better or you may create a lasting impact on reality that will far outlive you or you may find a greater internal peace of mind or feel better about yourself, or you may find yourself more self confident afterwards, or any of a number of other beneficial results may come of the creation of art. But these are consequents not causes.The point here is clear. It isn’t that we say to ourselves: “Hmm, I
wonder what I’ll do with my life. I know! Ill create this work of art
it will surely change the world and I’ll be rich and famous and it will
last far beyond my death making my life meaningful.” Nor do we say:
“Boy, I wish I weren’t creating this work of art but alas I just didn’t
have a choice in the matter. Poor me I was born with an Artist’s soul
now condemned to spend all my energy creating works of art.” No.
Rather our very thoughts about the matter are more immediate and
procedural. We think, “Wouldn’t that be cool if I could create such and
such. I could do this and that and, etc….”. Then we face the
decision of whether we will act upon this desire or choose to resist
our desire in order to engage in other things. And sometimes it’s good
and right to create and sometimes it’s good and right to resist and do
other things. Each circumstance is different. And most times which is more right is in no way clear, making the choice often an agonizing enough one that we often put off making the choice sometimes to our great detriment.It’s only after the fact
that we start to think about the impact of art on the world or
ourselves. Sometimes we guess that the impact in order to take that
into account when choosing to act toward the creation of the art we
already desire to create or do something else that we may also desire
to do. But these guesses are often incorrect and often irrational in
that they often manifest either our wants or our fears or both but
aren’t based on any cold hard analytical facts about the likelihood of
a particular creative work having an impact on the world or ourselves.
In any case, at this point you’re already motivated. You want to create
the work of art. The only question lies in whether you want it enough
to actually choose to do it over other possible things you could be
doing. That’s a choice we all have to make and it can be a tough one.And then comes the choice of what you should actually do with the work after you’ve created it which can be just as challenging.
