"We have art to save ourselves from the truth."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
Brief Summation of the Proper Way to Discuss and Value Art
by Mandate of…
…DC Smith
~ Explanation of an artist’s work is ever controversial. In essence the
endeavor is flawed because art is already communication of an image, idea or
impression. Never assume that the artist chooses his method of communication
arbitrarily! The didactic method of explanation is less apt in communicating
the underlying subject of art. I call those images, ideas or impressions that
are the subjects of art ‘underlying’, in order to differentiate
them from direct physical subject matter. The woman who poses for a painting
could be described verbally or by means of geometric proportions in a completely
satisfying way. However, each method of communication conveys a different image,
idea, or impression of her.
~Every method of communication is best suited for some underlying subject. The
underlying subject of specialized jargon is awkwardly rendered into layman’s
terms. Much of theoretical physics, especially since relativity, rests on the
premise that mathematics conveys unique images, ideas, or impressions of physical
phenomenon. A narrative description of a debate is a simplistic example of the
difficulty that arises from art’s explanation. Due to its rational basis,
didactic expression seeks to resolve the issue and has a natural tendency to
take a side. An artfully narrated conversation can reveal the complexity of
the issue in a way that transcends either side. I use the word ‘transcends’
because any communication transcends the determining characteristic of the most
personal thing in the world, an image, idea or impression, when it conveys that
underlying subject to another person, or possibly a dolphin.
~Art is sometimes called the highest form of expression because it has the widest
scope, and transcends the most obstacles. The ability to transcend barriers
such as generation and culture is prerequisite to distinguish a work of art
as great. However, Great art transcends even the inter-personal parameters of
communication, because it derives its greatness from the transcendent, objective
value of its underlying subject matter. That means it doesn’t matter if
a work is popularly appreciated, or if the audience comes away from it with
something of discernable worth, which they will be able to pragmatically apply
elsewhere. The beauty of a great work of art would endure even if the world
became depraved and there was absolutely no one left who appreciated it, just
as surely as 2 + 2 would still = 4 if everyone forgot the answer. The range
of its communication, relative to the greatness of its underlying subject determines
the greatness of art for the connoisseur community, but for the individual connoisseur
who is a true art lover as for the artist, the value of Great art is the proximity
it allows them to the unattainable forms of perfection. This criterion discriminates
an artist from others who may work in the same medium with different intentions,
such as an advertiser. The conveyance of art’s underlying subject is a
nobler and more arduous pursuit than provoking a big-mac attack, though they
are similar in incidental ways.