I found this at a website for puppeteers called Puptcrit Digest. An input by Steve Abrams in the topic of Art as communication.
If we are looking for the roots of art, I think art began with
mankind’s response to the beauty or power of the natural world.
Why is one particular bit of coastline considered more beautiful than another?
Why is one particular, mountain or valley or river or tree selected to
sacred and to have qualities that set it apart from all the other
mountains or valleys etc?
Often Myths are an attempt to explain or at least respond to some
aspect of the natural world- Apollo as the sun in his chariot blazing
across the sky, or Narcissus drowning as he contemplates his own
reflection.
These myths are among the earliest surviving examples of art- powerful
creative story telling? literature? drama? Certainly myths can be
considered art.
What were those early storytellers trying to do?
capture one unique sensory experience?
Was capturing the moment a way for one person to remember it?
Was it for the community?
Was it a way of giving thanks
Was it a way to try to find some meaning or pattern to the natural world?
was it to convey a thought about the natural world?
Was it to convey a feeling about the natural world? joy? respect, terror? awe?
Another thought. It might be important to separate the art and artist.
I firmly believe that lots of people who do not consider themselves to
be artists, have created art.
How could they not know this?
The borders of what is called craft and what is called art are very
unclear. When early potters created bowls to hold food, the first
impulse was just to make practical and needed object.
A bowl for food does not have to be beautiful, but at some very early
point in time, potters began to shape and decorate their bowls
Clothing, and shelter follow the same path.
A blanket to provide warmth does not need to be beautiful, but the
weavers craft? art? is sometimes remarkable
What motivates the craftperson to take the extra time and effort?
At what point do we call a beautiful piece of craft “art” ? Is the
distinction worth discussing?
I think that gardeners and cooks sometimes create art and sometimes not.
A famous chef was asked if his cooking was art.
He said something like this.
On some rare nights, when the ingredients are right, and the clients
are right, and I am right and the mood is right, at those rare times
the food from my kitchen is art. The rest of the time I am just
cooking dinner.
One more thought
One of the most brilliant artists that I know, the puppeteer Ronnie Burkett says he doesnt consider himself an artist. I don’t agree with him on this point but his
thoughts-as usual- are challenging.
He said
“You must understand, that “artist” is a word I do not apply to myself
yet. I hope to, before my last gasp. I am aware that I am surrounded
by no end of people who easily and quickly call themselves artists or
Master Puppeteers and so on, but my own definition of the word is
almost unattainable, for personally, I will not be an artist until I
have created a piece of work that cannot be discussed, only felt.”
I’m starting to think Art might be a spirit or energy in itself, requiring
agents to make it happen, nurture it by performing it, learning from it, and
enjoying it.
How else could we explain its presence even when there was no intent to make it?
I don’t feel so confused to believe humans just made up the concept and see it everywhere, like some kind of objective hallucination, perhaps to make a dreary existence less unbearable..
Some people believe that though.
Could Art be a deep manifestation of LIFE?
Wouldn’t this explain its continuing presence in nature, in us, in events,
in thoughts, in every human activity?
Wouldn’t this explain why toilets, of all things, can be beautiful pieces of
design?
Puptcrit Digest, input by Steve Abrams, Topic: Art as communication.
