Art is NOT a Thing
I’ve got a confession, sometimes I get stuck on words. I ruminate on the incongruity of a term, it’s formal definition and its purpose. I search for better words and simpler words. With that in mind, I’d invite you to take a wander through the conceptual realm of art.
What if I said that I don’t think Art is a thing? Yeah, like really not a thing. It’s not tangible. I’d like to make the argument that it’s always intangible and extremely personal, in some ways it’s ALWAYS about what YOU (but equally others individually) think is art. What if the title of “Art” is GIVEN by an observer? Rather than an OBJECT, it’s an OBSERVATION… it’s more of a credential.
Next time when you are thinking…
- This photograph is art.
- This painting is art.
- This exhibition is art.
- This performance is art.
- This film is art.
- This happening is art.
Take possession of it. Think of ART as a credential, bestowed by you (the observer) in reverence (honor) of directed human effort.
The experience of this photograph is art. This experience was given to me, right now, this makes the creator(s) the artist to me. The experience of art is contextual to its setting, its social time and place. It is connecting to me at a deep level, it reconnects me to myself and grows the depth of my experience.
Art is a quality that rises above craft (also amazing, but more technical skill, craftsmanship) to convey a sense of value, worth that is beyond execution but also concept and context. Art is sensitive to its surroundings, it should be applied with reserve.
So what then of the OBJECT that I used to think of as ART? I like the word ARTIFACT. An artifact is an archival fragment, something that is a tangible bit that’s left behind. This artifact is often what is referred to as “art” at least in terms of form. It’s part of a memory that is linked to the feeling of reward, this understanding is “Art”. This painting is artifact, so is a poster or compact disc, one might be rarer or rawer but they are each artifact.
Why clarify our terminology?
Why bother? Why is this idea of consequence?
Once we recenter around art as a credential, we make new space. We can apply Art to new spaces once we destroy the mental link to a specific format: music, performance, painting, photo, print, sculpture. Which of those did you consider “art” before, what else did you include? We also could include creating amazing outcomes in landscapes, environments, businesses, ritual/religion and healthcare spaces. We can seek to ever expand and appreciate our definition of art.
We create a selective gravity towards an amazing future. By empowering ourselves with the individual and democratic power of the word “Art” we can build a future that is driven to enlighten, to captivate with ideas put in motion.
How do you repossess the language that you choose?
Language is participatory, it is living. Words can take on new meanings, we individually might deepen the meaning of a specific word for a specific purpose. The more precise we are in defining our own language, the more control we have over our meaning. Especially when we share those definitions and differentiations with others. The more in tune we are with art, with the source of a word, with the flavor of reality the more robust our reality is in experience. Art as a quality is aspiration too, a way of living in appreciation making, sharing and indulging in the best human interpretations of this experience of life.
I’d ask you to please repossess (take back) the term Art. If you don’t like it, you can always go back to… what was your old definition again???
Art can be about speaking truth. It can be about connecting and growing understanding no matter the form it takes. It can be about sharing the wow of insight. Live curiously, look for the wow, the touch of a unique hand and reach for the word ART.
