(Originally Written March 7, 2008 in the Journal)
What is Art?
Leo Tolstoy
Chapter 16
History has shown that only religion has aided in the progress of humanity.
"The great evil is not that men do not know God, but they have set up instead of God, that which is not God" (Maude, 235). So it is with art today.
"Christian perception gave another, a new direction to all human feelings, and therefore completely altered both the content and significance of art" (Maude, 237).
"The essence of the Christian perception consists in the recognition by every man of his sonship to God and of the consequent union of men with God and with one another" (Maude, 238).
True art has the characteristic of uniting all men, not just a few. Non-Christian art may unite a few people, but in uniting those few they divide them from the many. Patriotic art is a prime example of this. Church art is another example. Good Christian art must transmit a feeling to all men regardless of their demographics.
Only two feelings unite all men:
1. Feeling stemming from the universal sonship of God and universal brotherhood.
2. Feelings of common life accessible to all men.
Only two objects for art can be considered good:
1. That which flows from love of God and the relationship of God to man and man to man.
2. That which flows from the most basic feelings felt by every human being.
The first is religious art; the second is universal art.
Religious art is manifested best in words, but can also be manifested in sculpture and painting. Universal art is best manifested in music, but can be manifested in dance, architecture, words, painting and sculpture as well.
The overburdening of the viewer with details of the producer blocks the transmission of feelings. The simpler, the better. In true art, feelings are expressed without superfluous extras.
The more detailed a story becomes, the more provincial it becomes and thus, the less universal it is.
In music, the melody is accessible to every one, but when extremely complex harmonies are added, the melody is lost and the piece loses universality.
Whether I like a thing or not, if it fails to be religious or universal art, I must consider it bad art. Only by judging first if a work transmits feelings or not and then deciding whether the thing unites or divides people can we decide if the work is real or counterfeit and if it is real, we can then decide if it is good or bad.
Art is spiritual food.
Friday, March 7, 2008
Monday, March 3, 2008
Notes on Tolstoy, What is Art? Chapter 12
(Originally Written Mar. 3, 2008 in the Journal)
What is Art?
Leo Tolstoy
Chapter 12
Three things cooperate to cause the production of counterfeit art:
1. The professionalism of the artist for hire
2. Art criticism
3. Schools of art
When art became a profession it was due to the upper classes' obsession with art for their pleasure. In art becoming a profession the most fundamental quality of art was lost, its sincerity.
Art criticism has also led to counterfeit art because criticism is being done by perverted individuals. The critics claim it is their job to explain art, but if an artist produces a true work of art, he transmits his feelings to others. Therefore, what is there left to explain?
An artist's work is not open for interpretation.
The artist would choose to express his feelings with words if he could, but he could not. Therefore, he expressed it with art.
Universal art has a definite and indubitable criterion - religious perception. Because the upper classes lack this they must search for some external criterion for art and thus, critics exist. Universal art needs no interpretation and thus, no critics.
Art schools are also harmful. How can one teach one how to transmit a unique feeling? These schools teach how to transmit feelings of other artists' experience. The teach how to counterfeit.
"Infection is only obtained when an artist finds those infinitely minute degrees of which a work consists, and only to the extent to which he finds them" (Maude, 201). These degrees of minuteness are only found when a man yields to his feelings. They cannot be taught to be found.
Schools may teach what is necessary to produce something resembling art, but not art itself. The teaching at schools stops exactly where art begins.
These three things, the making of art into a profession, art criticism and art schools have made most people unable to understand what is art by forcing them to become accustomed to counterfeits.
What is Art?
Leo Tolstoy
Chapter 12
Three things cooperate to cause the production of counterfeit art:
1. The professionalism of the artist for hire
2. Art criticism
3. Schools of art
When art became a profession it was due to the upper classes' obsession with art for their pleasure. In art becoming a profession the most fundamental quality of art was lost, its sincerity.
Art criticism has also led to counterfeit art because criticism is being done by perverted individuals. The critics claim it is their job to explain art, but if an artist produces a true work of art, he transmits his feelings to others. Therefore, what is there left to explain?
An artist's work is not open for interpretation.
The artist would choose to express his feelings with words if he could, but he could not. Therefore, he expressed it with art.
Universal art has a definite and indubitable criterion - religious perception. Because the upper classes lack this they must search for some external criterion for art and thus, critics exist. Universal art needs no interpretation and thus, no critics.
Art schools are also harmful. How can one teach one how to transmit a unique feeling? These schools teach how to transmit feelings of other artists' experience. The teach how to counterfeit.
"Infection is only obtained when an artist finds those infinitely minute degrees of which a work consists, and only to the extent to which he finds them" (Maude, 201). These degrees of minuteness are only found when a man yields to his feelings. They cannot be taught to be found.
Schools may teach what is necessary to produce something resembling art, but not art itself. The teaching at schools stops exactly where art begins.
These three things, the making of art into a profession, art criticism and art schools have made most people unable to understand what is art by forcing them to become accustomed to counterfeits.
A Poem on Pain
(Originally Written March 3, 2008 in the Journal)
Pain is like the grains of sand,
It is immeasurable and seemingly endless.
Life is like walking along the shore,
A vast barrier after the ocean blocks you
And you must continue to drudge through the soul.
But every now and then you happen upon a lost coin
Or some other treasure.
This is joy and it sustains you.
It makes the sand bearable.
I sit now though, wondering if the treasure is worth the sand?
Pain is like the grains of sand,
It is immeasurable and seemingly endless.
Life is like walking along the shore,
A vast barrier after the ocean blocks you
And you must continue to drudge through the soul.
But every now and then you happen upon a lost coin
Or some other treasure.
This is joy and it sustains you.
It makes the sand bearable.
I sit now though, wondering if the treasure is worth the sand?
Notes on Tolstoy, What is Art? Chapter 16 (A)
(Originally Written Mar. 3, 2008 in the Journal)
What is Art?
Leo Tolstoy
Chapter 16
Art, like speech is a mode of communication and therefore, of progress.
The evolution of knowledge is done through speech; the evolution of feelings is done through art.
The determining factor of whether a feeling is good or bad (more or less necessary) is determined by the religious perception of the age.
Tolstoy states progress is had by every generation or at least is possible by every generation. But, what if it is reversed? What if every generation is worse than the previous? Does that not make art even more important tomorrow then it is today?
While it may be claimed that there is no religious perception in this age that does not negate its existence. In fact we may even wish not to see it because it may expose that our lives are not consistent with it.
What is Art?
Leo Tolstoy
Chapter 16
Art, like speech is a mode of communication and therefore, of progress.
The evolution of knowledge is done through speech; the evolution of feelings is done through art.
The determining factor of whether a feeling is good or bad (more or less necessary) is determined by the religious perception of the age.
Tolstoy states progress is had by every generation or at least is possible by every generation. But, what if it is reversed? What if every generation is worse than the previous? Does that not make art even more important tomorrow then it is today?
While it may be claimed that there is no religious perception in this age that does not negate its existence. In fact we may even wish not to see it because it may expose that our lives are not consistent with it.
Notes on Tolstoy, What is Art? Chapter 15
(Originally Written Mar. 3, 2008 in the Journal)
What is Art?
Leo Tolstoy
Chapter 15
The way to separate art from counterfeit is to consider its infectiousness. True art infects; counterfeit art does not. If a work does not create a union between the producer and the audience then it is not art. Art, true art, destroys the separation and isolation of one's own personality and unites men under one feeling.
The degree of infectiousness is the measure by which we judge good art. The stronger the infection the better the art is. The degree of infectiousness depends on three things. First, the feeling that is transmitted. Second, the clearness of the transmission. And, third, the sincerity of the artist. The third is the most important to how infectious a piece will be. The absence of any one of these conditions precludes a work from being art. This is how art is judged regardless of its subject matter, regardless of whether the feeling transmitted is good or bad.
What is Art?
Leo Tolstoy
Chapter 15
The way to separate art from counterfeit is to consider its infectiousness. True art infects; counterfeit art does not. If a work does not create a union between the producer and the audience then it is not art. Art, true art, destroys the separation and isolation of one's own personality and unites men under one feeling.
The degree of infectiousness is the measure by which we judge good art. The stronger the infection the better the art is. The degree of infectiousness depends on three things. First, the feeling that is transmitted. Second, the clearness of the transmission. And, third, the sincerity of the artist. The third is the most important to how infectious a piece will be. The absence of any one of these conditions precludes a work from being art. This is how art is judged regardless of its subject matter, regardless of whether the feeling transmitted is good or bad.
Notes on Tolstoy, What is Art? Chapter 14
(Originally Written March 3, 2008 in the Journal)
What is Art?
Leo Tolstoy
Chapter 14
If we admit that art is a man's intentional transmission of his feelings to another we must also admit that what the world of the upper classes calls the whole of art is not art at all, but counterfeit. The difficulty we have in deciphering what is real art from what is counterfeit is that there is so much counterfeit art existing today. Also, the difficulty arises in the skill of the counterfeiters. Their external craftsmanship often is better than true artists.
True art is modest.
What is Art?
Leo Tolstoy
Chapter 14
If we admit that art is a man's intentional transmission of his feelings to another we must also admit that what the world of the upper classes calls the whole of art is not art at all, but counterfeit. The difficulty we have in deciphering what is real art from what is counterfeit is that there is so much counterfeit art existing today. Also, the difficulty arises in the skill of the counterfeiters. Their external craftsmanship often is better than true artists.
True art is modest.
Notes on Tolstoy, What is Art? Chapter 13
(Originally Written Mar. 3, 2008 in the Journal)
What is Art?
Leo Tolstoy
Chapter 13
The combination of two arts into one (like Opera) is asking to do the impossible. It is asking to have two new feelings expressed independently as one. If there is a combination of arts, either one or both works are counterfeit.
One of the chief conditions of artistic creation is "the complete freedom of the artist from every kind of preconceived demand" (Maude, 205).
True art exists as such that if one tiny part were altered or replaced or moved then the entire piece would cease to be art.
Wagner's subversion of music to poetry is absurd. One art form cannot serve another. Each must exist independently of one another. Wagner hypnotizes his audience. This hypnosis produces his desired effects upon people. They are not infected as they would have been by true art. If one fails to be hypnotized by this spectacle they sit silently so as not to be criticized for their view. They sit as a sober man does in the midst of the drunk.
What is Art?
Leo Tolstoy
Chapter 13
The combination of two arts into one (like Opera) is asking to do the impossible. It is asking to have two new feelings expressed independently as one. If there is a combination of arts, either one or both works are counterfeit.
One of the chief conditions of artistic creation is "the complete freedom of the artist from every kind of preconceived demand" (Maude, 205).
True art exists as such that if one tiny part were altered or replaced or moved then the entire piece would cease to be art.
Wagner's subversion of music to poetry is absurd. One art form cannot serve another. Each must exist independently of one another. Wagner hypnotizes his audience. This hypnosis produces his desired effects upon people. They are not infected as they would have been by true art. If one fails to be hypnotized by this spectacle they sit silently so as not to be criticized for their view. They sit as a sober man does in the midst of the drunk.
Sunday, March 2, 2008
Notes on Tolstoy, What is Art? Chapter 11
(Originally Written March 2, 2008 in the Journal).
What is Art?
Leo Tolstoy
Chapter 11
Universal art only arises when some man, having experienced a strong emotion feels the necessity to transmit it to others. The art-on-demand world of the upper classes has stretched even bad artists because even bad art demands spontaneity. Therefore, to meet demands they have taken up the task of producing imitations of art. They have developed four methods of counterfeits:
1. Borrowing
2. Imitation
3. Striking
4. Interesting
By borrowing, counterfeiters take recognized poetic elements and incorporate them in a piece, giving people an impression of art. This is counterfeit because the producer is not transmitting any feelings of their own, but regurgitating another's feelings. Imitation is a method that they use to transmit feeling by imitating real life. They describe it so technically we feel it to be real. The method of striking involves bringing tother two contrasts for dramatic effect. The fourth method is interesting. The producer introduces an interesting element to the audience and the audience mistakes artistic impression for interest. Often a work is called a good piece of art if it is either poetic, or realistic or striking or interesting. But, these things have nothing to do with art at all.
Poetic means borrowed. To say a thing is good art because it is poetic is akin to saying a coin is good because it resembles money.
To judge a piece of art's goodness based on its realness is akin to judging the nutritive value by its external appearance.
In using imitation there is no transmission of feelings, only an action on the nerves.
If work is interesting then we either receive new information or that the work is not fully intelligible and we must work to understand it. Interestingness of pieces not only has nothing to do with artistry, but actually hinders artistic production.
While any piece of art may be a combination of petic, realistic, striking and interesting, these things do not replace the essence of art - feeling experienced by the artist.
In order to produce a real work of art a man must:
1. Stand at the highest level of conception of life at the time
2. Experience feeling
3. Have the desire and capacity to transmit feeling
4. Have a talent in a form of art (talent is ability)
Counterfeit productions of art are made from recipes. Art, true art, has no recipe or formula.
What is Art?
Leo Tolstoy
Chapter 11
Universal art only arises when some man, having experienced a strong emotion feels the necessity to transmit it to others. The art-on-demand world of the upper classes has stretched even bad artists because even bad art demands spontaneity. Therefore, to meet demands they have taken up the task of producing imitations of art. They have developed four methods of counterfeits:
1. Borrowing
2. Imitation
3. Striking
4. Interesting
By borrowing, counterfeiters take recognized poetic elements and incorporate them in a piece, giving people an impression of art. This is counterfeit because the producer is not transmitting any feelings of their own, but regurgitating another's feelings. Imitation is a method that they use to transmit feeling by imitating real life. They describe it so technically we feel it to be real. The method of striking involves bringing tother two contrasts for dramatic effect. The fourth method is interesting. The producer introduces an interesting element to the audience and the audience mistakes artistic impression for interest. Often a work is called a good piece of art if it is either poetic, or realistic or striking or interesting. But, these things have nothing to do with art at all.
Poetic means borrowed. To say a thing is good art because it is poetic is akin to saying a coin is good because it resembles money.
To judge a piece of art's goodness based on its realness is akin to judging the nutritive value by its external appearance.
In using imitation there is no transmission of feelings, only an action on the nerves.
If work is interesting then we either receive new information or that the work is not fully intelligible and we must work to understand it. Interestingness of pieces not only has nothing to do with artistry, but actually hinders artistic production.
While any piece of art may be a combination of petic, realistic, striking and interesting, these things do not replace the essence of art - feeling experienced by the artist.
In order to produce a real work of art a man must:
1. Stand at the highest level of conception of life at the time
2. Experience feeling
3. Have the desire and capacity to transmit feeling
4. Have a talent in a form of art (talent is ability)
Counterfeit productions of art are made from recipes. Art, true art, has no recipe or formula.
Notes on Tolstoy, What is Art? Chapter 10
(Originally Written Mar. 2, 2008 in the Journal)
When a person creates art for all mankind then he strives to make it intelligible to all men, but when one is hired by a single person he strives only to make it intelligible to that man. The latter is enormously easier and by doing so makes the piece either obscure or utterly incomprehensible to outsiders; and thus, is not art. This practice has become so rampant that cloudiness, obscurity and indefiniteness of expression have actually become esteemend.
Baudelaire banished eloquence, passion and truth from poetry. Mallarmé said that the charm of poetry is that one must guess its meaning.
The artist of this age relies on the teachings of Wagner and Nietzsche claiming they need not make their work comprehensible to the vulgar.
Baudelaire transmits feelings that are evil and base. He purposefully shrouds them in obscurity. Even if one works to comprehend the meaning, one is not rewarded, but perverted by the work. Verlaine, when he decides to actually make his work comprehensible produces works that are bade in both form and content. Both Baudelaire and Verlaine lacked sincerity and simplicity but possessed, abundantly so, artificiality, forced originality and self-assurance. How these two became leading artists shows how art had ceased to be important in their society and how art sunk to mere amusement.
The subject matter of this 'high art' has become severely limited so they invent new, poor forms to mold their subject matter.
Mallarmé and Maeterlinck produced poetry with absolutely no meaning and it is probably this utter meaninglessness that led them to being published. "To avoid the reproach of having selected the worst verses, I have copied out of each volume whatever poem happened to stand on page twenty-eight" (Maude, 169). That's funny!!
Millions and millions of working hours have been spent on the production of these unintelligible works of high art in turning them into books and plays, etc.
Painting far surpasses writing in its obscurity, especially of the Symbolists, Impressionists, and Neo-Impressionists. Drama has likewise become obscure and meaningless. In the music today, all a aman can do in transmitting his feelings can transmit the weariness of his incomprehensible song. Novels are too absolutely unintelligible in both form and substance.
Some problems with judging art in Tolstoy's way: If I have a right to say that the masses do not understand my art it is because they are underdeveloped then those who fancy the new art have the right to say I do not understand their art because I am underdeveloped. If I have the right to say that me and my cronies can say that the new art is bad because it says nothing then the masses who do not understand my art (and are more mass then my crowd) can call my art bad because it says nothing to them.
Tolstoy states that as a man of the early part of the century does not have the authority or right to say that the new art is bad, but only that it is incomprehensible. The consolation that Tolstoy then has is that what he considers to be art is incomprehensible to far fewer than the new art is. The only conclusion that then can be made is that as art becomes more and more exclusive it becomes more and more incomprehensible to an ever increasing number of people
Art has been subjected to this situation that eventually only the producer will understand his production gand then he will say I understand my art and all who don't are worse because of their incomprehension...
Any assertion that states art can be good and yet incomprehensible to large swathes of the masses is completely unjust, "Perverted art may not please the majority of men, but good art always pleases everyone" (Maude, 176).
Some men claim that art that is difficult to understand is good art and can be understood by all by viewing that same incomprehensible art over and over again. In reality though this does not educate anyone. It only habituates them to it. One can often habituate themselves to many bad things: bad food, alcohol, tobacco and opium. The same is true with art; one can habituate themselves to bad art.
The difference between art and speech is that there are no language barriers. I do not need to know a specific language to understand why a piece is a great piece of artwork. "Great works of art are only great because they are accessible and comprehensible to everyone" (Maude, 177).
If something does not move many people it is not because these people lack understanding but that thing is either bad art, or not art at all.
Art is differentiated from all other mental activities in that there is no prerequisite knowledge necessary. Art infects the observer, whatever his place of development is.
Now, good art may be incomprehensible to some people but that is because those individuals have been perverted and are destitute of all religion. (Religion is man's relation to God.)
When a person creates art for all mankind then he strives to make it intelligible to all men, but when one is hired by a single person he strives only to make it intelligible to that man. The latter is enormously easier and by doing so makes the piece either obscure or utterly incomprehensible to outsiders; and thus, is not art. This practice has become so rampant that cloudiness, obscurity and indefiniteness of expression have actually become esteemend.
Baudelaire banished eloquence, passion and truth from poetry. Mallarmé said that the charm of poetry is that one must guess its meaning.
The artist of this age relies on the teachings of Wagner and Nietzsche claiming they need not make their work comprehensible to the vulgar.
Baudelaire transmits feelings that are evil and base. He purposefully shrouds them in obscurity. Even if one works to comprehend the meaning, one is not rewarded, but perverted by the work. Verlaine, when he decides to actually make his work comprehensible produces works that are bade in both form and content. Both Baudelaire and Verlaine lacked sincerity and simplicity but possessed, abundantly so, artificiality, forced originality and self-assurance. How these two became leading artists shows how art had ceased to be important in their society and how art sunk to mere amusement.
The subject matter of this 'high art' has become severely limited so they invent new, poor forms to mold their subject matter.
Mallarmé and Maeterlinck produced poetry with absolutely no meaning and it is probably this utter meaninglessness that led them to being published. "To avoid the reproach of having selected the worst verses, I have copied out of each volume whatever poem happened to stand on page twenty-eight" (Maude, 169). That's funny!!
Millions and millions of working hours have been spent on the production of these unintelligible works of high art in turning them into books and plays, etc.
Painting far surpasses writing in its obscurity, especially of the Symbolists, Impressionists, and Neo-Impressionists. Drama has likewise become obscure and meaningless. In the music today, all a aman can do in transmitting his feelings can transmit the weariness of his incomprehensible song. Novels are too absolutely unintelligible in both form and substance.
Some problems with judging art in Tolstoy's way: If I have a right to say that the masses do not understand my art it is because they are underdeveloped then those who fancy the new art have the right to say I do not understand their art because I am underdeveloped. If I have the right to say that me and my cronies can say that the new art is bad because it says nothing then the masses who do not understand my art (and are more mass then my crowd) can call my art bad because it says nothing to them.
Tolstoy states that as a man of the early part of the century does not have the authority or right to say that the new art is bad, but only that it is incomprehensible. The consolation that Tolstoy then has is that what he considers to be art is incomprehensible to far fewer than the new art is. The only conclusion that then can be made is that as art becomes more and more exclusive it becomes more and more incomprehensible to an ever increasing number of people
Art has been subjected to this situation that eventually only the producer will understand his production gand then he will say I understand my art and all who don't are worse because of their incomprehension...
Any assertion that states art can be good and yet incomprehensible to large swathes of the masses is completely unjust, "Perverted art may not please the majority of men, but good art always pleases everyone" (Maude, 176).
Some men claim that art that is difficult to understand is good art and can be understood by all by viewing that same incomprehensible art over and over again. In reality though this does not educate anyone. It only habituates them to it. One can often habituate themselves to many bad things: bad food, alcohol, tobacco and opium. The same is true with art; one can habituate themselves to bad art.
The difference between art and speech is that there are no language barriers. I do not need to know a specific language to understand why a piece is a great piece of artwork. "Great works of art are only great because they are accessible and comprehensible to everyone" (Maude, 177).
If something does not move many people it is not because these people lack understanding but that thing is either bad art, or not art at all.
Art is differentiated from all other mental activities in that there is no prerequisite knowledge necessary. Art infects the observer, whatever his place of development is.
Now, good art may be incomprehensible to some people but that is because those individuals have been perverted and are destitute of all religion. (Religion is man's relation to God.)
Saturday, March 1, 2008
Notes on Tolstoy, What is Art? Ch. 9
(Originally Written Mar. 1, 2008 in the Journal).
What is Art?
Leo Tolstoy
Chapter 9
The perversion of art has weakened art and nearly destroyed it. Art has been deprived of its infinite, varied and profound religious subject matter by the faithless upper class.
Since art is viewed by only a small group it has lost its beauty of form and become obscure. Art has lost its sincerity and has become artificial.
Art product is only art when it transmits a new feeling, not a regurgitated one.
There is nothing older and more used than mere enjoyment. There is nothing newer or more fresh then the religious feelings of the day.
Man's enjoyment has natural limitations, but his religious progression is limitless.
New feelings can only be formed by new religious convictions.
The lack of belief in the upper classes has deprived them of any subject matter for art.
The rich and the powerful and thusly idle, experience very little and all can be summed up to three feelings: pride, sexual desire and the weariness of life. The lack of belief in the upper classes has sunk their transmissions down to the feelings of pride, discontent with life and the lowest of sexual lust.
What is Art?
Leo Tolstoy
Chapter 9
The perversion of art has weakened art and nearly destroyed it. Art has been deprived of its infinite, varied and profound religious subject matter by the faithless upper class.
Since art is viewed by only a small group it has lost its beauty of form and become obscure. Art has lost its sincerity and has become artificial.
Art product is only art when it transmits a new feeling, not a regurgitated one.
There is nothing older and more used than mere enjoyment. There is nothing newer or more fresh then the religious feelings of the day.
Man's enjoyment has natural limitations, but his religious progression is limitless.
New feelings can only be formed by new religious convictions.
The lack of belief in the upper classes has deprived them of any subject matter for art.
The rich and the powerful and thusly idle, experience very little and all can be summed up to three feelings: pride, sexual desire and the weariness of life. The lack of belief in the upper classes has sunk their transmissions down to the feelings of pride, discontent with life and the lowest of sexual lust.
Notes on Tolstoy, What is Art? Ch. 8
(Originally Written March 1, 2008 in the Journal).
What is Art?
Leo Tolstoy
Ch. 8
The fine art of Europe is only possible through the slave labor of the lower classes. Only by their toil can the rich and powerful continue to enjoy their elite, artless art.
Even if we were to admit the un-admittable to the high art it can be shown that this fashionable art is not the whole of art in that the common man would find this art completely unintelligible. The fine art is unintelligible to the masses because it expresses feelings of men who have never known the life of toil that is common to nearly all men. The feelings that are evoked in the masses by this art, if they evoke feeling at all, are often contrary to the artist's feelings. Such feelings as honor, patriotism and amorousness will only evoke bewilderment, contempt or indignation in the masses. What the working man would understand in the fine art would not elevate his soul, only pervert it.
If art is a spiritual blessing for all men then it ought to be accessible and intelligible to all men. But, if art is not these things then either art is not as important as we say or the art today is not true art.
What is Art?
Leo Tolstoy
Ch. 8
The fine art of Europe is only possible through the slave labor of the lower classes. Only by their toil can the rich and powerful continue to enjoy their elite, artless art.
Even if we were to admit the un-admittable to the high art it can be shown that this fashionable art is not the whole of art in that the common man would find this art completely unintelligible. The fine art is unintelligible to the masses because it expresses feelings of men who have never known the life of toil that is common to nearly all men. The feelings that are evoked in the masses by this art, if they evoke feeling at all, are often contrary to the artist's feelings. Such feelings as honor, patriotism and amorousness will only evoke bewilderment, contempt or indignation in the masses. What the working man would understand in the fine art would not elevate his soul, only pervert it.
If art is a spiritual blessing for all men then it ought to be accessible and intelligible to all men. But, if art is not these things then either art is not as important as we say or the art today is not true art.
Notes on Tolstoy, What is Art? Ch. 7 (B)
(Originally Written March 1, 2008 in the Journal).
What is Art?
Leo Tolstoy
Ch. 7
Pro captu lectoris habant sua fata libelli - The fate of books depends on the head of the reader.
Goodness, beauty and truth are treated as metaphysical and fundamental, but this is not the case.
However we understand goodness "our life is nothing but a striving towards the good, that is, towards God" (Maude, 141). Goodness is the fundamental metaphysical perception which forms the essence of our consciousness. Goodness cannot be defined; but it defines everything else.
Beauty is merely that which pleases us. It does not belong to the same fundamental level as goodness. Beauty often lies contrary to goodness because goodness often results in victory over the passions, while beauty has its roots in the passions.
The terms, 'moral beauty' and 'spiritual beauty' are word games that simply are another way of saying goodness.
Truth is merely a correspondence of an expression with reality. It is not fundamental like goodness is.
What is Art?
Leo Tolstoy
Ch. 7
Pro captu lectoris habant sua fata libelli - The fate of books depends on the head of the reader.
Goodness, beauty and truth are treated as metaphysical and fundamental, but this is not the case.
However we understand goodness "our life is nothing but a striving towards the good, that is, towards God" (Maude, 141). Goodness is the fundamental metaphysical perception which forms the essence of our consciousness. Goodness cannot be defined; but it defines everything else.
Beauty is merely that which pleases us. It does not belong to the same fundamental level as goodness. Beauty often lies contrary to goodness because goodness often results in victory over the passions, while beauty has its roots in the passions.
The terms, 'moral beauty' and 'spiritual beauty' are word games that simply are another way of saying goodness.
Truth is merely a correspondence of an expression with reality. It is not fundamental like goodness is.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)