What is art?

I studied art, did a degree in it, studied along side some artists who are quite famous now. As writing slowly became my primary focus, creating things that you might considered an “art object” has become less of a priority. I still make things. I have boxes of stuff hidden away, notebooks full of pieces, things I’d like to make when time permits.

One of the reasons for my ambivalence is the feeling art is someone else’s culture. The knowledge you need to engage with and understand art often seems obscured from me. Art is incredibly subjective, and prone to the vagaries of taste, and taste is just fashion. I find myself wondering who sets the fashion?

I often sum up this malaise with “art’s just rich people’s decoration”.

I studied art because at school I was a very practical student, and good at drawing. That ability lead to art school. Actually what it lead me to was an education, not a great one, but enough to make me curious. I wouldn’t be writing if I hadn’t done all those practical things before, which is perhaps why I view my writing in very physical terms.

I haven’t completely abandoned art or the idea of being an artist, but I’m not sure I’ll get over the notion that it’s someone else’s culture.

More recently I came across a documentary about the legendary American graphic designer Milton Glaser that’s changed my ideas a little.

Glaser argues art objects are an extension of the tribal tradition of gift giving. Objects would be exchanged as a way of cementing relationships. Without the exchange of these objects we would be at war, we’d be killing each other. These objects provides a collective experience, tell a story that connects us.


Follow up to another rejection

In my last post I outlines my rejection by the Euroscript Screen Story Competition and the readers report I received. I sent an email briefly outlining my concerns. Here is the response I got back from the reader.

The relationship comes across very much as having a father-daughter dynamic, which is why I was left with that overriding impression (hence why I clumsily referred to it as such), although appreciate that this is a huge error to have made, and apologise that this has understandably left you thinking your treatment was dealt with inadequately. I hope that the analysis of the other elements of the treatment reflect the level of thought that has gone into what might be required to develop the treatment in future, however. There is a deal of character development required on Christine, regardless of the relationship, and as mentioned, the fractured style of writing should be amended so that the narrative is easier to follow and engage with. Currently the action is described in an abstract fashion rather than in a form that can easily be visualised, and this hinders the effectiveness of the treatment overall. Strong visually exciting scenes, with clearly defined characterisations that are multi-faceted and conveyed through behaviour and action as well as dialogue, will be of great importance for future drafts. Sincere apologies for the mix-up Darrin.

%d bloggers like this: