ysabetwordsmith | Philosophical Questions: Art

Current Mood: busy

Entry tags:

recurring posts

Philosophical Questions: Art

People have expressed interest in deep topics, so this list focuses on philosophical questions.

What benefits does art provide society? Does art hurt society in any way?

Key benefits include:

* an outlet for self-expression and communication

* which leads directly to useful discussions about current issues

* beauty in public spaces, which is good for mental health

* a safety valve for discontent that is not violence (e.g. rude graffiti) I am a big fan of trains as rolling public art galleries.

* history, because often all we have left of lost civilizations is their artistic content in durable materials (e.g. statues, decorations on buildings, clay pots)

Further Resources

https://madhansart.com/importance-of-art/

https://www.thestudiodirector.com/blog/importance-of-art-in-society/

http://artlightinc.com/art/importance

https://drawingsof.com/why-is-art-important/

http://artloftasia.com/blog/5-benefits-of-practicing-art/

https://canadianart.ca/features/7-things-everyone-needs-to-know-about-art-disability/

https://www.adultsandcrafts.com/blogs/blog/166165703-the-top-ten-benefits-of-crafting-for-adults

https://momlovesbest.com/benefits-of-art-for-kids

https://artfulparent.com/the-benefits-of-art-for-kids/

https://www.canr.msu.edu/news/the_benefits_art_therapy_can_have_on_mental_and_physical_health

https://www.pinalcentral.com/casa_grande_dispatch/health_and_wellness/the-many-benefits-of-arts-and-crafts-for-seniors/article_9515e810-e16b-11e5-8e95-57cb42f7b2a1.html

https://artfromthestreets.org/blogs/news/positive-benefits-of-creating-art

https://becomeawritertoday.com/creative-hobbies/

https://dayswithgrey.com/art/50-art-activities-for-kids/

https://www.shihoriobata.com/blog/creative-hobbies/

https://9creativelives.com/2012/12/150-activitieshobbies-to-start-or-revist-when-youre-bored/

https://www.newlifestyles.com/blog/6-hobbies-and-crafts-to-take-up-in-retirement

https://www.ableize.com/disabled-arts/crafts-and-hobbies/

https://scootaround.com/en/27-fun-hobbies-for-wheelchair-users-that-arent-basketball

"If you year a voice inside you say, 'You cannot paint,' then by all means paint, and that voice will be silenced."

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Since I read a book with interviews with James Baldwin, many parts of the quote below have stuck with me, including the ending about art disturbing the peace. And I very much agree. Art can open doors to other worlds and allow norms to grow and change, by being in opposition, by being different, by demanding space.

“Art has to be a kind of confession. I don’t mean a true confession in the sense of that dreary magazine. The effort it seems to me, is: if you can examine and face your life, you can discover the terms with which you are connected to other lives, and they can discover them, too — the terms with which they are connected to other people. This has happened to every one of us, I’m sure. You read something which you thought only happened to you, and you discovered it happened 100 years ago to Dostoyevsky. This is a very great liberation for the suffering, struggling person, who always thinks that they are alone. This is why art is important. Art would not be important if life were not important, and life is important. Most of us, no matter what we say, are walking in the dark, whistling in the dark. Nobody knows what is going to happen to them from one moment to the next, or how one will bear it. This is irreducible. And it’s true for everybody. Now, it is true that the nature of society is to create, among its citizens, an illusion of safety; but it is also absolutely true that the safety is always necessarily an illusion. Artists are here to disturb the peace. They have to disturb the peace. Otherwise, chaos.” James Baldwin

I think that is true, but it is not the whole truth. That is, it's one role art can take, but not the only role, and other roles are just as important. See my comment elsethread regarding different approaches that artists have taken to potholes, and different ways that I use art.

There is something to what verdande writes about art showing "others have been here before me." However, that somewhat reduces it to a reddit thread. For all I scoff at social media. Not necessarily a bad thing, in that sometimes it's a way to get multiple opinions on something. Also, reading history can do the same thing on a broader scale: all the problems we face have been faced before. So I agree with you that it is A function, but not THE function. More thoughts as I read along this thread.

Graffiti was the original social media. People traced lines on cave walls to say, "I was here." We have names, drawings, game boards etched into temple steps by bored guards or petitioners. There seems to be a ubiquitous human urge to say, "I was here," and art is very good at that. When it's fresh, it's defacement and people bitch about it. But it's very valuable for archaeology, especially after calendars became common and people started using dates as well as names.

To quote; "the purpose of art is to comfort the afflicted, and afflict the comfortable!"

It's a tool. Moreover, it's a reactive tool. So whether it does harm or good to society, rather depends on society.

>>To quote; "the purpose of art is to comfort the afflicted, and afflict the comfortable!"<<

I thought this was (one of) the unofficial motto(s( of Quakerism! LOL

As for harmful... anything can be harmful.

But art is vastly useful and beneficial for so many things - it is on par (or maybe even surpasses) with languague as far as usefulness and versatility.

We need art, and ultimately, whatever negatives come with it are far surpassed by positives.

Art is like fire, a good servant but a terrible master.

I note that humanity discovered both at about the same time.

It depends on the society, but also the artist.

Some art is meant to question, to disturb, even to provoke.

Some art is meant to soothe, to reflect, to heal.

There are many reasons for art, and many benefits from it. You can't reduce it down to one.

I'm not an artist by trade, but I do a variety of artistic things for different purposes. I've made crystal window dangles because they are pretty. One of those has a weathered wood hanger, because I like wabi-sabi aesthetics and it contrasts nicely with the precise and brightly colored prisms. I've made memorial scrapbook pages in honor of my mother. That's art as healing, but also, as timebinding.

Look at the two approaches of art to potholes:

* Make it beautiful.

* Make it rude enough that the city will fix it.

Both of these are important public art, they are equally valid responses to the same problem, but they take opposite trajectories in attempting to solve it. Art does that a lot.

>>I'm not an artist by trade,...<<

I would argue that you are, with words. Poetry, songs, and stories are all art.

Wordsmith, yes, and that is a type of cultural material.

I was referring more to visual art. I'm good at a variety of crafts. In terms of 2D art, my eye for color and composition are completely intact, but I don't draw or paint well in this life. Things like scrapbooking I can still do because they use different skills.

>>I was referring more to visual art.<<

That's where we are diverging then. To me art is something like 'deliberate arraingement of stimuli a) in a pleasing manner or b) to stimulate emotions.'

So to me, cooking, dancing, sign-singing, perfumery, braiding hair, etc can all count as art.

>>In terms of 2D art, my eye for color and composition are completely intact, but I don't draw or paint well in this life.<<

I still think you don't have to paint or draw to be an artist.

I can draw, but I certainly can't do all the tricks I've seen used. (I am less good at painting.)

I can still appreciate other folk's skill though.

That I always heard as being the motto/purpose of self-important journalists. The "self-important" part being my addendum. Every time I hear that, I think that they would be better off doing the comfort part by providing food, shelter, or whatever is really needed, and the as to the afflicted part, whatever massive bit of sadistic self-importance makes them think it is a journalists, or anyone else's job, to afflict people.

Art makes us feel better about our lives. If some long-ago writer described the misery she felt in a given situation, it helps us deal with our own misery : "misery loves company". And singing helps us get through it.

That is often true, and art for coping tends to be very different than art for protest -- although either can be disturbing to some viewers.

I sing "Dona Nobis Pacem" for comfort when the headlines get too crazy. For protest, I'd rather sing one of Malvina's old songs like "From Way Up Here" or "Come Away Melinda".

Good choices.

Some of my favorite battle songs are from Firestorm by Leslie Fish.

"We did triage in the parking lot - treatable, dangerous, grave; A sad eyed-fireman gave the axe to those we couldnt't save..."

Leslie's songs alway hit the mark.

Edited 2022-06-23 22:47 (UTC)

"It is bread we cry for, but we cry for roses too."

Reminded me of this movie scene:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qNQs6gSOkeU

Never sure if Judy Collins originated "Bread and Roses," it she updated a traditional, true, folksong. Either way, I've always found it striking.

Addendum: just looked it up. Exact origin of phrase unclear, but used by suffragettes and labor unions (mostly female ones) c1911, incorporated into a poem, and set to music by several artists. Now that I know that... still find it striking.

Edited 2022-06-18 22:50 (UTC)

My great-grandmother was a Lowell mill girl, originally from the north of Ireland. SHe met, was courted by, and married a Scottish-born carpenter. (I know he courted her. I have a necklace that belonged to her, and I knew him before he died, and I can just imagine him putting aside a bit from his pay-packet in order to buy something pretty for his pretty girl!) So whenever I sing Bread and Rose, I sing it with my great-gramdma's voice :-)

That’s charming

Our ancestors were people too, with personal desires like ours. They had to work for their living, they fell in love and started families, and expressed themselves in their own arts.

As the song says, 'As we come marching, marching, a million women dead, Go crying through our singing, their ancient call for bread. Small art or love or beauty their drudging spirits knew - Yet it is bread we cry for, and we cry for roses too!"

I seem to come from a long line of people who didn't do what they were expected to do (one ancestor was on the Mayflower), and did it extremely well.

Most of my ancestors were people who didn't do what was expected of them. I try to carry on the tradition.

Have enjoyed the comments. I had an initial literal response to your question in thinking of Art as being Painting and Sculpture (and maybe Architecture), which I would definitely put down as "beautifying public spaces," if so much of it wasn't so ugly.

>> Have enjoyed the comments. <<

Yay!

>> I had an initial literal response to your question in thinking of Art as being Painting and Sculpture (and maybe Architecture), <<

Well, it depends on how you define art. Painting and sculpture are among the things widely considered "fine art." They are done mostly by white men, who can afford to, so they get a lot of respect. Art done mostly by women and poor people is dismissed as "folk art," like Mexican murals or black women's quilts. It's all art.

A lot of people think of art as something beyond their own skill. Hence why I'm more impressed by representational art; abstract art has to be quite spectacular to impress me.

From an anthropological perspective, "art" is anything and everything done for decorative purposes rather than practical purposes. A line of triangles on a pot is art, and it's important because small details in decoration allow archaeologists to identify the time period a piece was made and where it came from if found far from its origin. Wine jars are a great example because they were shipped far and wide; jewelry is another.

>> which I would definitely put down as "beautifying public spaces," if so much of it wasn't so ugly.<<

Yeah, modern America is stupid when it comes to art and architecture, and has been for decades. This is easily demonstrated because looking at art across many periods and cultures, we can identify things humans like (e.g. symmetry, geometric features like the Golden Rectangle, ornamentation outlining important things such as doors with carvings) and that's not what modern America does anymore. Yes, it's ugly. It's also bad for people.

Agree that Art doesn’t have to be visual, it was just what I initially thought of when you posted the question. In fact, I think most ppl would react the same way: initial thought = art is visual, followed by a 2nd thought that Art can mean many things, including Writing, etc. (Or, to be mildly pedantic, “Art can be many things, including Art.”)

Uglification cannot just be pinned on America/Americans. It’s a worldwide phenomenon.

>> Agree that Art doesn’t have to be visual, it was just what I initially thought of when you posted the question. In fact, I think most ppl would react the same way: initial thought = art is visual, followed by a 2nd thought that Art can mean many things, including Writing, etc. (Or, to be mildly pedantic, “Art can be many things, including Art.”) <<

I'm a big fan of tactile art. I love edible sculpture if it is, in fact, edible and not composed of processed foodlike art product.

>> Uglification cannot just be pinned on America/Americans. It’s a worldwide phenomenon.<<

It's not universal. It's widespread in a handful of countries. Some other places have extremely different aesthetics -- Mexico, for instance. Paris built the Montparnasse Tower, people generally considered it an eyesore, and they have not gone about building lots more. You see a lot of Brutalism in parts of Russia and China because, awful as it is, it's cheap to build and fits their politics. Places well known for their beauty are much less attracted to it, like Italy.

Exactly right.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Philosophical Questions: Art

no subject

Well ...

Re: Well ...

Re: Well ...

no subject

no subject

Yes ...

Well ...

Re: Well ...

Re: Well ...

Re: Well ...

no subject

no subject

Yes ...

Re: Yes ...

Re: Yes ...

Re: Yes ...

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

Thoughts

Re: Thoughts

Re: Thoughts

no subject