A Critical Critique of Current Criticism

[areleejensen]

Do you like Criticism?

I have been reading about it lately.

You should take a look at this, oh intellectuals of the world.

Comments

[areleejensen]

I really like that idea about art.

When did you study John Dewey? I'm not familiar with that name. I'd love to read more about it.

That sounds like the perfect definition of what you called "great art" - I've not ever thought about it like that before.

And, I suppose, as you understand experience you understand great art more. Also, as you understand art more, you get more from your experiences. It seems no wonder, now, that the best critics are also artists. They translate real life and art so well - it would seem they really do have an almost prophetic understanding of the world. Just wait till Lord Byron hears that. He'll be jumping up and down saying, "I told you so! I told you so!"

This is all very beautiful to think about, connecting to a higher (perhaps even divine?) state of mind. I know when I am truly engrossed in art, it brings everything about life and experience within the realm of my understanding. It seems to complete my thoughts and rein them in somehow - to give an important and essential perspective to existence.

I've read a lot of Oscar Wilde in my day - the prophet of astheticism - and have always wanted to pinpoint why I considered his work so wonderful. He's not one to plant rich morals within his work, so I always wondered why it touched me so deeply, why I love him so much. He just has such a sense of beauty in everything about him - it always drew me in. And if you really study him closely - there are hidden truths inside so much of what he has written. He relates the rest of the world to me through humor and pretty words - and I can better experience the world through his genius understanding of it. I like that thought.

I have been learning in my writing class the virtue of showing versus telling in art, particularly writing. It's much more artistic to say, "Clara spun beneath a mural of golden leaves and laughed into the crisp fall air" instead of saying, "Clara was happy". Art has us represent feelings in order to feel them better... which is strange, but wholly more effective. We see the color blue and we feel sad. Not because blue is sad in and of itself, perhaps mildly on a subconscious level, but more so because it represents sadness... and we understand that representation so well - it becomes a language that many people can speak.

Yes, art reaches out and works, in a way, universally to elevate the minds of the people. I like that idea. I like it very much.

[phatfhorn]

These are all concepts that I read and discussed in the Theories of Art class I took at USC with Dallas Willard. We read John Dewey towards the end of the course when discussing grand theories and criticism. The class also focused on developing a definition of art, and exploring that definition based on real life artistic examples. We also went into the individual arts, creative and performance, and discussed the aesthetic possibilities---what they do well, and what they don't. It was a very eye-opening experience, and I'd love to talk about it more.

The current fashionable philosophies have really dragges art through the mud, so much that people can't tell mediocre artistic attempts from truly great works. It doesn't help that the National Endowment of the Arts continues to fund substandard artists. I support the NEA, but I think there needs to be more discretion to the kinds of art that it supports. It often fails to live up to its own slogan, "A Great Nation Deserves Great Art" by churning out substandard after substandard pieces, and supporting artists that completely lack vision.

I'm not sure if the NEA supported , but its a prime example of post-modern art without vision. When someone asked the "artist" what the piece means, he said "it doesn't have to mean anything, its ART!". This is an aestetic philosophy I do not support.