3 hours ago
13 October 2009
Subjectivity: Isn't it Grand?
Last week, while on my trip, I watched part of Mona Lisa Smile, a movie that I really enjoy simply because it's different. There's a scene in the middle where the teacher shows her students different slides of various works of Art--something grotesque, something childish, and finally an advertisement. "Is this Art?" she asks her class.
One of the students answers, "It's only Art when someone says it is."
"It's Art!" the teacher declares.
To which the student replies with a scathing look over her shoulder, "The right someone."
Perhaps you've had this discussion before. When is something we write considered Art? Is it because it was written down on actual paper? Is it when someone reads it? Or is it only when it elicits a response, whether one of disgust, one of wonder, or the myriad of emotions in between?
And of course, if a tree falls in the forest and there's no one to hear it, does it make a sound?
The beauty of Art is that it is subjective, something that affects each of us differently. Things that move you might not move me--and vice versa. It's the beauty of humanity, how we are each unique, each masterpieces, and can differ so greatly from each other.
And then there's the question: who are the "right" people? Agents? Editors? Publishing staff?
Or the readers?
If my novels never get published, are they still Art? Or is that elusive label only for books on the shelves?
I believe that Art elicits a response, and that the right people are simply the audience that lends their attention. For that to happen, the creator needs to create in whatever form he/she needs to so an audience can view it. Then again, the artist can be the audience as well. After all, we have definitely have our own opinions and responses to what we create. Why can't we be that "someone" for ourselves?
That being said, I still want that publishing contract. :0)
See y'all Thursday!
**Image found on Google Images***