''The idea is not to live forever, but to create something that will.''
(Andy Warhol)
Well, Andy Warhol (1928-1987) certainly managed to live up to those words.
Some suggest that he is responsible for: the rise of Pop Art, for
changing the concept of what being an ''artist'' means, introducing
new art techniques (the use of silkscreens and the use of overhead projectors),
coining the phrase ''15 minutes of fame'' and predicting the
rise of the media and celebrity culture.
Some say that ''art is a reflection of society and the times in which it
is created'', and as an artist, Andy Warhol's work can in my view be viewed
as a representation of the most important events that took
place during his life time.
What about now?
Is the arts not just an indulgence?
With mass un-employment, thousands of people
dying every day and all over the planet, people and businesses going
broke, people losing their homes, etc.etc.etc. what
could the arts possibly contribute?
Sometimes it can be easier to appreciate the importance of
something by imagining the absence of it,
so let's imagine a world in which there is no art of
any kind nor any artists.
No movies, no music, no visual arts of any kind (including any
kind of graphics/designs), no sculptures, no magazines, no TV, no radio,
no You Tube, no photos, no books, no Video's, no DVD's,
no fashion, no architecture, etc.etc.etc.
Come to think of it, if you are interested, there is a movie
titled ''Equilibrium" (2002) with Christian Bale which pretty
much depicts what a world without art would be like.
The underlying premise in the movie is that emotions
are prohibited as they are the primary cause for fighting and friction.
Art stirs emotions, so all forms of art are prohibited.
(Although it is true that we ''need bread to live'', is it not
perhaps equally true that we cannot ''live by bread alone'?)
Take an average day for instance: the bed we slept in was designed
by an artist, so were the sheets, the clothes we wear, the shoes,
the furniture, the coffee maker, the car we drive, the phone,
etc.etc.etc.
For an idea to progress from the abstract to something concrete,
an artist/designer has to interpret the idea and turn it into
a visual representation.
For instance, would we be able to grasp the concept of
what DNA is if somebody had not created a visual representation of it?
Before we had the technology of photography to memorialize
events, people, structures, etc. we only had artists renditions thereof.
Take someone like Leonardo da Vinci for instance, not only did
he paint portraits, he also did in-depth sketches of both anatomical
and botanical subjects. He combined his scientific curiosity with his
skill with both pencil and brush and left behind an invaluable legacy
for both the sciences and the arts.
How important is the arts in the midst of a crisis?
In my view it depends on how we define what it means to
be an artist.
What if the definition of an artist is someone who is able
to conceptualize ideas, imaginations, and emotions into
something tangible?
What if art is something that expresses /communicates emotions,
ideas, and life as experienced by an artist?
Is it not possible that the arts may be something that can help
us cope with troubling times even if momentarily?
I think it can.
I believe it is possible to experience comfort and joy through music,
poetry, movies, musicals, theater performances, ballets, comedies,
architecture, sculptures, cartoons, anime, and so on.
Art, in my view, is made by people for people to share their experiences
of what it means to be a human.
''Art is science made clear.''
(Jean Cocteau)
No comments:
Post a Comment