Who Art Thou That Judgest?

---

Passions Collide – Art’s Title is a Two-Way Street.

How do we decide who decides what art is? Is that something mutually decided? Who is official enough to declare what is and isn’t ‘art’?

If someone is trying to express their own being, be it their thoughts and feelings, into something else and encapsulate it almost as if to ‘imbue’ it with an essence of their self or experience. Can that be denied from being art? Yes. Not to the individual towards themselves, should they cast it as art. But to being generally considered art, I believe yes. A great many things we do in our lives could technically embody multiple definitions of art. And whilst art is subjective such as our experience also is, not everything we do is automatically then ‘art’ and granted that respect. That is to say what art is, must be received as art how others respond to art, not just simply declared as by the creator and hence forth now shall be known as art. 

There has to be an emotional reaction ignited in some kind of way along with the proposal, and appreciation that helps define art. So it’s not only just the origin involved and intent for something to be known as art. What grants it as art, has to resonate with the spectator, and as a trend with those that observe. So we could say art is a form of call and response, were expression is expressed, and then tested by a change of emotional state of which we could say we become moved. Though that does also put emphasis and question on the character of the spectator during an announcement.

Thinking also along the lines of those that make art their profession, and not just the artist themselves, but including the likes of art dealers and such. Students of art studying the art of art itself. Does an artist or student of art or art teacher etc. have more of a say – as to say their opinion is more valid and important in the subjective realm of art – than someone of a different industrial profession? And therefore it’s not simply about what a piece of work does to someone else emotionally that’s unilaterally accepted? But there’s a hierarchy to it. In debate atmospheres, there is such as a thing as an ‘appeal to an authority’, as a fallacy. When something is declared as acceptable or true over evidence, because some kind of ‘commission’, a group with influence, or even just acts as an authority figure.  Is that not something similar? Not really, as for evidence of what? Something subjective? 

It’s like the difference between an amateur and professional. We’re talking someone or a group that is classically trained – teachings built upon generational experience as the subject in question also progressed – whom is then going to understand nuance. Someone experienced themselves that is going to appreciate subtleties as translated messages otherwise blind to. And through their own skill, contribute perception to the culture of art that is otherwise unattainable. And they I’d guess would say in their heightened understanding; ‘Why in fact yes, someone well studied in art does know more about what art is than someone who isn’t, just like any other profession’. Or we could compromise and say with their accomplished gaze, exist on a higher plane of judgement criteria as they’ve spent more time and energy into the understanding of the very meaning for something to be art.

Though all of that could be nothing but hot air if they haven’t got anything capable of moving others en masse to show for it. And maybe somewhat of a clique can form to help enable their own artwork to ascend to magisterial protection under this guise as a survival strategy and career prospects. Speaking generally of course.

EDWARD MORAN (1829-1901) Ships at Night

So, having considered that, if I was to go to an art gallery supposedly filled with art, and I was in fact not moved emotionally speaking. What then? Is that the fault of the art? Not being art enough? To activate something intrusively curious inside me? Or perhaps that’s my fault in some way? Maybe in a similar way someone with a sweet tooth doesn’t taste the natural sugars of certain fruit as they are too accustomed to a purely concentrated source? Too used to my CGI explosions is it? Or maybe I’m uncultured?  Maybe that’s exactly what I am to the proud but offended artist exhibiting their grand work in that gallery that thinks I wouldn’t know art even if it slapped me cold in the face?

What if I’ve seen it all before, nothing’s that impressive? We do live in such a spoilt time. And nothing’s really new or exciting? Or maybe that what ignites that love of what art is, that response, is attuned to something else? Or, perhaps I’m from a different culture or generation though, a different environment and background, and see through a different defining indoctrinated or socially progressed lens? Does that then make myself or the art in some way ‘lesser’ or wrong or any negative connotation because an effect didn’t happen? Or are things just to be accepted as different? Would it be that simple? That civil? Does their need to be correction? Or can it be enough to say there is multiple interpretations that coexist peacefully? And art comes in many shapes and forms appreciated by all?

An absence of emotional reaction towards something presented in the class of adjudged art, does there need to be standoffishness amongst the differing parties? Considering there was a form of rejection towards emotional expression, which is usually considered a negative thing. Perhaps in their heart there should be. As the lack of appreciation for what’s considered art, some might say is a sign of degeneracy and regression, even the threat of cultural death. That also supposes then a lack of intelligence that is required to acknowledge the art missing, as the facies of mud sediments begin to fly. For the other party returns fire with something similar implying instead a lack of evolution, and a reluctance to accept change and to leave peacefully.

And thusly we can see the power of art overall casting its spell of influence as two sides passionately clash with multiple forms of itself embodied within us to compete for light as plants do, as old fights new. Whilst art is diverse and complex, based on varied personal emotional experience that is relatively specific to those that subjectively experience it, that will not taper the motives of those that project their own feelings onto definition for another for the sake of their own meaning, but what that means of them and ourselves, we are still yet to spectate.