How I got into junior college: Essay 2
2. Write an analytical essay discussing a problem,
theory or idea that you find compelling. You may draw
from any source-for example, a book, a current event,
or a work of art-but please do not submit a research
paper or something you have written for class.
What does it all mean?
Meaning is created. Meaning is interpreted.
Meaning is.
Meaning has.
It is meaning that has defined humans and humans that have defined meaning.
Such a paradox worries me in the most brilliant of fashions. It involves me and envelops me. It engulfs me.
A connection between the synapses of the acception, the interpretation, and the creation is apparent. Yet where lies the distinction?
As an artist I have grasped for the creation of meaning, and the interpretation of my creation, yet the creator of the meaning is ever so elusive. Is the interpreter not the creator of meaning, if so, where does the artist’s role arise? A quandary has come forth. Is the artist merely a mode of transportation to meaning, the master of the destination, or both?
A passion for the understanding of creation, the interpretation, and the acceptance of meaning has grown within me and has led to my consumption. I relay to you from the intestines of this undertaking.
I present you two exhibits of personally created meaning.
Exhibit A:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v287/jmeugenio/colurpoop.jpg
Above is the attempted creation of jovial noise through the beat of colour. Of starts and stops, stops and starts. Bursts of colour explode (and implode) with the youthful exuberance of a time lost. The innocence and arrogance of an era of joyous saturation seep through the ‘all right’ giggles. A thumbs up reassures any perceptions of having peaked. Childlike glamour whispers the secrets of an upbringing immersed in television. An open mouth reveals the gateway into the innards of a decade once removed. A decade that masked innocence in youthful culture.
Exhibit B:
A man approaches a boy sitting down in the countryside
Man: Why hello there.
Boy: Hiya sir.
Man: Now what exactly is it that you are doing there.
Boy: Where?
Man: Why just sitting there, right before me!
Boy: Oh, waiting.
Man: And what is it that you are waiting for?
Boy: Fruit.
Man: Fruit?
Boy: Well yeah, fruit.
Man: Hmm, and why are you waiting for fruit here?
Boy: Where else would I wait for fruit?
Man: Perhaps at a store, or at an orchard.
Boy: I prefer it here.
Man: But there is no tree in sight.
(Beat)
Man: Where is this fruit going to come from?
Boy: God.
Man: Really now?
(Beat)
Man: Well do you mind if I wait with you?
Boy: Not at all mister.
(Man attempts to sit down)
Boy: No, not like that! That’s just silly.
Man: What?
Boy: You can wait with me, but you have to wait the right way.
Man: All right, is this correct?
Boy: No! You just don’t understand.
Man: Well why don’t you just help me understand?
Boy: Uh, I think you should just leave mister.
Man: I couldn’t very well just leave you here all alone, now could I?
Boy: I was alone before you got here.
Man: Well I am here now so I am going to stay with you.
Boy: But I am waiting.
Man: I know, and I want to wait with you
Boy: Well, why don’t you kneel mister?
Man: Kneel? But you are sitting.
(Boy does not say anything)
Man: Well, I suppose so, you know best eh? (Man kneels) You know when I was a kid I would come out to the countryside. When I needed to free my mind.
Boy: I am just waiting mister.
Man: Oh, well, hmm. So do you really expect fruit to come?
Boy: Well yeah, it just needs to ripen.
Man: Ripen eh?
Boy: Yeah, did you want some fruit?
Man: Huh, why are you waiting for fruit if you have some?
Boy: Here yah’ go mister. (Boy hands man fruit)
Man: Hold up, what is this?
Boy: Its fruit!
Man: Well I’ll be damned....
(Takes bite of fruit)
Man: Who would have thought that you had fruit all along.
Boy: I didn’t.
Man: What?! Yes you did, you just….
Man: Oh god!
(Man drops dead)
My first intentions with exhibit B were to create a corrosive comedy touching upon youthful cannibalism. Yet in the creation of a simple tale I noticed my opportunity for a criticism on waiting, and the disparity of its interpretations amongst adults and children. The concept of fruit, and the symbol of ripening provides the foundation of the piece.
Next is the role of the visitor, otherwise the builder, otherwise the interpreter.
Exhibit A, like all other created meaning, is open to the entire array of interpretations that a viewer possesses. One may rationalize it as senseless babbles of mark and totally disregard all possible meaning. Another may herald it for its modernization of classical Greco-Roman archetypes, flooding a scene from atop Mt. Olympus into the throat of the layman, providing a biting social criticism of accepted doctrine and tradition. The joys of innocent candy ridden giddiness can easily blind the viewer into viewing a decidedly positive work of artistry, whereas the pessimistic viewer sees the sleazy corruption and the neon marketing of a toxic downfall.
Exhibit B presents a dialogue, allowing for even greater variance of interpretation. The director, the actors, and the playwright all must sacrifice their personal interpretations of meaning and agree to a medium in which they craft a cohesive whole. The end product is then relayed to the audience, allowing the viewers to create all final decisions as to their understanding of meaning. Some viewers may see the exhibit as a warning of the seduction of sin, and a reminder of mans fall from grace. Others may interpret it as a commentary on the acceptance of death, or even the realization of one’s fate in the wake of forgetting God. Drug addiction, a love affair, suicide, and starvation are all plausible meanings (depending on the viewers relative interpretation of what is plausible). The burden of death can even be placed upon the viewer, for it is upon them to render meaning into the autopsy. Meaning is always correct, yet always incorrect, searching for satisfaction in its interpolation.
Now that I have attempted to relay the grasp of the viewer, we must now understand the artist’s affect unto this interpretation. How much credit is due to the artist, if any at all? Can an artist even ensure that their intended message is portrayed? Some artists even resort to a Brechtian bluntness (of which I am guilty), in which they directly hammer their meaning into their audience. Yet, does this not allow for a greater variance in interpretation? If Exhibit B were to be entitled, On World Affairs, would the reader not only seek, yet possibly conclude a relationship amongst the text and their own perspective of world affairs, not necessarily the perspective of the author? And what of whether the author seeks to distract his reader, does such a distraction add yet even more depth?
Once an individual viewer creates meaning through interpretation, he then becomes a part of a communal interpretation, in which there is accepted meaning through a community. This consensus helps set boundaries for allotted interpretations, though each individual’s meaning may vary.
It is this very interplay between both of the creators, the author and the viewer(s), that sifts meaning from the mounds of variance in interpretation. One cannot exist without the other, and meaning effectively requires both parts of such an equation, though one may have a much greater influence unto the end product, depending upon the will of the individuals at hand. I personally have experienced both ends of this ‘equation’ and thoroughly enjoy the offerings of each. Many a time I find myself acting as both creator and viewer, simply to strengthen my sense of perspective. It is this astute perception that has allowed me to both create meaning out of seemingly random occurrences, and to detract meaning from accepted symbols. Such a power is dizzying and worrisome, defining the very boundaries of meaning.
I understand that even about this ambiguity, I too am ambiguous; responding to vagaries with vagaries. I however yield to conclusion:
Meaning is defined by the end user, for they are the last sculptor in the manipulation of meaning. Whilst I have sympathies for the artist, I must concede interpretation of meaning to the audience, both as an artist and audience member. For whilst the artist can form and define judgments to be passed onto the viewer, it is the viewers final discretion onto whether they will abide by the artists precedents. By no means am I to deemphasize the artists role in the relationship of meaning (for without the artist, there is no decision to be made), however it should be understood with whom the responsibility of meaning lies.
Yet the artist within me beckons!
Meaning is a marriage! (who am I to decide? [I am the creator {or the interpreter?}])
What does this mean?
Shall I decide or shall you? And what of the rest of them?
We shall.
Though I would have done much of nothing....