For your consideration
bellicosus and nthcoincident have had a few discussions with me on the necessity of ingenuity, mystery, negative space, interesting detail, ugliness, and a degree of risk in writing, with their powers combined one would hope to combat boring and predictable fiction. While what we've talked about applies mostly to the technicalities of writing (imagery, scene, form etc) they should apply to any practice of which the intent is emotional provocation--it seems a bit facetious to put "art" here. I've cited a few sources in these discussions that I think are interesting and should probably be collected in one place.
1. Nobody blames maths for being difficult - and it isn't difficult - but it is different, and demands some time and effort. It is another kind of language. Literature is also another kind of language. I don't mean literature is obscure or rarefied or precious - that's no test of a book - rather it is operating on a different level to our everyday exchanges of information and conversation.
--from Ignore the Booker brouhaha. Readability is no test for literature, The Guardian
Speaks for itself really.
2. "...disapproves of any art that merely makes itself available to gratify its culture" and "Art is antagonistic, it should never degrade into politics".
--(out of context) Denis Donoghue, The Reith Lectures: The Arts Without Mystery, 1982
Lectures 1,2 and 5 are probably my favorite. He's mostly talking about paintings, and tends to be a bit jumpy subject-matter wise but his discussion of critics and critique in lecture 2 is also very good. Number 5 is kind of the big ol' summary, but basically he explains in a much more elegant way why occasionally art should make you look twice, or be uncomfortable and why you shouldn't necessarily compound the piece as freudian humdrum.
3. "...there's a phrase called following the brush--you are discovering something".
-- Michael Ondaatje, BBC interview for "The Cat's Table"
This is a great interview in which to look at the way Ondaatje creates with necessary distance to and from his personal life. Ondaatje is incredibly thoughtful and this is really an excellent overall interview that talks about editing, movie adaptations etc.
1. Nobody blames maths for being difficult - and it isn't difficult - but it is different, and demands some time and effort. It is another kind of language. Literature is also another kind of language. I don't mean literature is obscure or rarefied or precious - that's no test of a book - rather it is operating on a different level to our everyday exchanges of information and conversation.
--from Ignore the Booker brouhaha. Readability is no test for literature, The Guardian
Speaks for itself really.
2. "...disapproves of any art that merely makes itself available to gratify its culture" and "Art is antagonistic, it should never degrade into politics".
--(out of context) Denis Donoghue, The Reith Lectures: The Arts Without Mystery, 1982
Lectures 1,2 and 5 are probably my favorite. He's mostly talking about paintings, and tends to be a bit jumpy subject-matter wise but his discussion of critics and critique in lecture 2 is also very good. Number 5 is kind of the big ol' summary, but basically he explains in a much more elegant way why occasionally art should make you look twice, or be uncomfortable and why you shouldn't necessarily compound the piece as freudian humdrum.
3. "...there's a phrase called following the brush--you are discovering something".
-- Michael Ondaatje, BBC interview for "The Cat's Table"
This is a great interview in which to look at the way Ondaatje creates with necessary distance to and from his personal life. Ondaatje is incredibly thoughtful and this is really an excellent overall interview that talks about editing, movie adaptations etc.