Chaos Into OrderforioscribeMay 17 2003, 23:32:46 UTC
If you dig a little deeper, you'll find that the function of art is to transform chaos into order. It provides meaning in the face of meaninglessness.
Much of human distress springs from a fear of the unknown or unfamiliar, something like "existential dread." Art relieves this distress because it suggests there actually is a purpose to life, or at least that one person--the artist--has found something that resembles it.
last night I watched Rabbit Proof Fence and I suffered for it. I don't think all art is supposed to make us feel one specific way or another, but that all art has in common with itself, is that it is communication about stuff that the artist(s) think is important enough to create for.
To me, the most significant aspect of any artwork, is the frame: what surrounds the piece? Usually, the more hoity-toity the matte, frame, gallery, museum, the less compelling I find the work itself. My favorite art is street busking, or paintings hung on their creator's walls, or time capsules, or driftwood constructions on the beach. The exceptions always get me excited, though.
Yeah, and sometimes the terms could be reversed...robertsloan2May 19 2003, 23:39:08 UTC
I sometimes see that distinction as arbitrary and topical, having found the deep inspiration, strong themes and insights that changed my life in exactly the sort of genre fiction usually called escapist -- and casual entertainment in stuff labeled literary.
I think what books affect what readers in either way varies so much that it's easier just to sort topically and assume that whatever other people like is valid for them.
Re: Yeah, and sometimes the terms could be reversed...puristloveMay 20 2003, 00:26:04 UTC
Well, what I was attempting to do, was point out the real difference between escapist and "literature" as opposed to what people think they are. I'd call someone like George Martin literature, well he's probably summarily dismissed as escapist by Academia, if he's even on their radar at all.
A lot of Shakespeare was purely escapist, just fun with words and characters, yet he's taught in every Literature class in the country.
But my primary point was, they've both got a purpose, and it's equally noble.
Comments 6
Much of human distress springs from a fear of the unknown or unfamiliar, something like "existential dread." Art relieves this distress because it suggests there actually is a purpose to life, or at least that one person--the artist--has found something that resembles it.
Reply
Reply
To me, the most significant aspect of any artwork, is the frame: what surrounds the piece? Usually, the more hoity-toity the matte, frame, gallery, museum, the less compelling I find the work itself. My favorite art is street busking, or paintings hung on their creator's walls, or time capsules, or driftwood constructions on the beach. The exceptions always get me excited, though.
Reply
I think what books affect what readers in either way varies so much that it's easier just to sort topically and assume that whatever other people like is valid for them.
Reply
A lot of Shakespeare was purely escapist, just fun with words and characters, yet he's taught in every Literature class in the country.
But my primary point was, they've both got a purpose, and it's equally noble.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment