Saturday, March 9, 2013

Art, Bullshit and Science

Last night, I was discussing the views of Art with a friend. We were discussing various movies and what not. Art is very subjective, yes? But it can also be very stupid at times. For example, apparently the glow light from "Star Wars" represents the male's penis. Wtf?

Furthermore, I could make up shit like that and it would be so appreciated. "Oh that guys hat in the movie represents America. For no reason. It just does." And some group of "well studied" people will appreciate my understanding to be so profound.

Really now? I know "bullshitting" helps in exams and what not. But like there's an extent for everything, "bullshitting" also has its extent! You can't bullshit your way through a conversation. It will just make you sound ridiculous and slightly stupid. You need some form of knowledge on which you can base your words on.

Many people take advantage of art. They think it's the easiest form of studies and has no structure. It's all subjective and opinion based. Yes, to an extent, that is true. But that doesn't mean it's easy. I'll tell you something, Science, to an extent, is way easier than art. Why? Because Science has a definite answer. Art doesn't. There are so many answers, opinions, discussions, it's endless! You have so many theories and artists to refer to, that you are forced to find someone unique, that no one has ever heard of. You want to be different. In Science, if you're different, you're wrong. In Art, if you're different, you're unique.

Pink Floyd - We Don't Need No Education


  1. Personally, I consider these sort of interpretations to be "low-brow." I think it's much easier to formulate interpretations than it is to truly experience a work of art. To me, uncovering "hidden" meanings and symbols doesn't add much value; it's much more interesting when a person approaches art as an aesthetic, intellectual and/or emotional experience that impacts our perceptions and our understanding of life, behavior, people, art itself, whatever.

    I feel that the need for clever responses to art and the detective approach gets in the way of the real experience. Have you ever engaged with an art work that grabbed you and changed you somehow and yet you couldn't explain its mechanisms or its "meanings"? To me, that is what is valuable and important.

  2. It's very rare to come across a person who thinks like you do. The thing is, it's easy to say that art is 'inexplicable" in certain cases. However, thanks to something called "education" and "exams" such implications cannot be applied. Furthermore, people who actually engage in art are not Art Students per say. It's very rare. I've, personally, engaged myself in many art works and some I loved to the core and some I did not appreciate. It's normal. But to be forced to read and interpret art work is what frustrates me at times.

    Having said all this, I do agree with your point of view as I think similar. Thanks for the input :)