Saturday, August 6, 2016

Art With a Capital A

"There really is no such thing as Art.  There are only artists."—E.H. Gombrich, The Story of Art

An unfortunate start to an otherwise great book.  (And an ironic start to a book titled The Story of Art.)  Gombrich in his introduction claims "art" means different things in different times and places, and obsessing over "Art with a capital A" can undermine both the creation and the enjoyment of artistic works.  


Cave Paintings, Lascaux, France, 15,000 to 10,000 BC
"Art" may mean different things in different times and places, but it must share some element of meaning in all times and places.  If it didn't, we couldn't have a story of art—not one that spans millennia at any rate.  And the works themselves, from the earliest cave paintings to Picasso's Violin and Grapes, must have something in common.  If they didn't, how would Gombrich know what to include in his book? 


Pablo Picasso, Violin and Grapes, 1912
Given what passes for art today, it seems worthwhile to try to identify the common denominator, both in the word and the works.  And it shouldn't be that hard.  Art comprises manmade, physical stuff.  Defining "art" is not like trying to define "beauty" or some other transcendent idea.  Some things are art, other things are not.  And it's easy in most cases to tell which is which.   



2 comments:

  1. G.K. Chesterton would agree that art means something - in fact he thinks that it is one of the ways that man is more than animal. He also seems to think that representation is important to the endeavor.

    Regarding the artist of the cave drawings:

    " Under whatever archaic limitations, they showed
    that love of the long sweeping or the long wavering line which any man who has ever drawn or tried to draw will recognise; and about which no artist will allow himself to be contradicted by any scientist. They showed the experimental and adventurous spirit of the artist, the spirit that does not avoid but attempt difficult things; as where the draughtsman had represented the action of the stag when he swings his head clean round and noses towards his tail, an action familiar enough in the horse. But there are many modern animal-painters who would set themselves something of a task in rendering it truly. In this and twenty other details it is clear that the artist had watched animals with a certain interest and presumably a certain pleasure.

    and further on ...

    "It is the simple truth that man does differ from the brutes in kind and not in degree; and the proof of it is here; that it sounds like a truism to say that the most primitive man drew a picture of a monkey and that it sounds like a joke to say that the most intelligent monkey drew a picture of a man. Something of division and disproportion has appeared; and it is unique. Art is the signature of man.

    From Chesterton in "The Everlasting man"

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks. I had forgotten what Chesterton says about art in "The Everlasting Man." Obviously I need to pick him up again. I too think representation is important to the endeavor. My next post will be on that very topic. (Maybe I should reread G.K. first.)

    ReplyDelete