Plague Journal, Art & Religion
My reading in Julia Kristeva’s This Incredible Need To Believe continues. Here are some quotations from the book that are particularly arresting this morning.
What is art?
…adventures of immanence. Infinite intellectual love (literature, art, etc.) when they are carried out and received not as “objects of consummation” but as the very being of the active intelligence and the plenitude of the loving experience. p. 35
Does this not indicate to you why that painting, that sculpture that you “just had to have,” which you paid dearly for, continues to speak to you? These are not collectables, or objects to embellish a room. They are active conversations that continue to express the meaning of, and the love for life.
What of the creative process?
We must describe and analyze the logic, not of the product, but of productivity, with as much precision as the “disciplines” allow… It is this “community” of the partakers in the creative experience that interests me,.. p. 35
To be a partaker in the creative experience, — would not that be a satisfactory definition of human fulfillment? The definition works for me. A journey that never ends… The journey can continue by means of landscaping/gardening in one’s yard, or by the editing and sharpening of the language of a story that one is writing. Or perhaps in the kitchen by mindful preparation of a meal. This is what is meant by “belonging” to a community.
What is the effect of artistic achievement (a painting, a story, a tune etc.) upon the recipient?
…[greatness] is manifest as we are capable of reading the text as a tactile, gustatory, olfactory, oral, visual experience along with and beyond its verbal construction: a carnal experience associated with the flesh of the world. …via this “impudence of enunciation” that is style, sublimation communicates to the reader the impact of a perception, triggering the effect of contact with the real. p. 36
These compact lines of prose describe what happens when you or I read or hear a well written story, or lines of a poem, each word mindfully written to do its job. We are transformed, transported to feel with our senses what is real, not unlike the experience of a high mass on Christmas eve, or a front and center seat at a Van Halen concert.
Jump
by Van Halen
I get up
And nothing gets me down
You got it tough
I’ve seen the toughest all around
And I know
Baby, just how you feel
You’ve got to roll
With the punches to get to what’s real
Oh can’t you see me standing here
I’ve got my back against the record machine
I ain’t the worst that you’ve seen
Oh can’t you see what I mean?
Might as well jump. Jump!
Might as well jump
Go ahead, jump. Jump!
Go ahead and jump
Ah-oh, hey you! Who said that?
Baby, how you been?
You say you don’t know
You won’t know until you begin
So can’t you see me standing here
I’ve got my back against the record machine
I ain’t the worst that you’ve seen
Oh can’t you see what I mean?
Might as well jump. Jump!
Go ahead and jump
Might as well jump. Jump!
Go ahead and jump
Jump!
Might as well jump. Jump!
Go ahead and jump
Get it and jump. Jump!
Go ahead and jump
Jump! Jump! Jump! Jump!
Lyrics composed by David Lee Roth, Alex Van Halen, Edward Van Halen
2 thoughts on “Plague Journal, Art & Religion”
Thank you, once again, for a thought provoking offering. As is the case with many a blog, I have a differing point of view with regard to a few of the notations above.
For instance: “To be a partaker in the creative experience, — would not that be a satisfactory definition of human fulfillment?” For my perspective, each human life is filled with a variety of creativity, regardless of whether or not someone views themselves as “creative.” Every single day we make decisions about what to eat, where to go, what to wear, or how we interact with the people and the world around us. Each one of those directions we choose is a manifestation of the creative mind at work. We have choices A, B, & C. There is most likely benefit and risk to each of these choices, so we engage our analytic and creative juices to come to a conclusion. It may not have been the best choice, but at the time, it appeared to be so. This could be as banal as selecting a pair of socks or as potentially life changing as to where to invest an IRA fund. No matter what the circumstance, we make creatively based choices each day and these creative choices tell our story, they communicate to others how we view the world.
With regard to the impact of “Art”:
You note, “They are active conversations that continue to express the meaning of, and the love for life.” & “These compact lines of prose describe what happens when you or I read or hear a well written story, or lines of a poem, each word mindfully written to do its job.”
My issue here has to do with the perceived “quality” of a rendering of artwork, be it painting, photography, cooking, knitting, sculpting, writing, or whichever medium one has chosen as a form of expression. The viewer (or reader) experiences whatever art form is presented with a jaundiced eye, a completely subjective sense of the world. Therefore each creative expression is compromised from the start. Did Van Gogh paint masterpieces that speak to millions of people across decades or are we told that Vincent Van Gogh was an extraordinarily creative genius and hence, we view his work through the standards set by society and culture? On the flip side, what of the many young minds who write heartfelt poetry in a personal journal, most verses of which will never see the light of day beyond their own eyes? Aren’t these no less creative than Vincent’s Starry Night, yet the perception is that societal acceptance is the true bellwether of “quality”. When Sotheby’s auctions a Van Gogh for $140 million, the message to the world is that this art is important.
What this all comes down to is the question of whether a singular item speaks to the viewer or reader. There is no right or wrong, no absolute, no true gauge by which we can judge another’s creative output. Only history can place a long term value onto a piece of work, such as Shakespeare or Rembrandt or the even the works of Copernicus and Newton. In the meantime, humanity allows for potentially extraordinary work to be lost, simply because it does not fit the construct our culture has manufactured for acceptance within the world of art and literature. Oh well.
All of your comments have merit. There is much more to be said to qualify and to extend the viewpoint that I attempted to express. As I write after reading what Julia Kristeva wrote in 1941 it is as if her words are the carrier wave for my understanding, many years later. In the generations since 1941 significant changes in Western culture have inevitably shaped my interpretation of her words, my outlook upon the dynamism of art.
History, the passage of time is the ultimate arbiter of what is lost, and what is acclaimed. There is no respite, no remedy — except to carry on, to keep the creative conversation going.