In the last two journal entries, I have talked about art and hopefully given people a chance to express their views. I am not really sure what enticed me into asking these questions, perhaps it is because my computer is still broken and I have nothing to post. (That is of course the cynical side). Or perhaps it was just a real desire to hear peoples ideas and thoughts. What ever the reason, I want to express my thanks to everyone who responded and shared their ideas. I really do not know if this should go anywhere, or even if I want it to. I guess time, and your comments will have to determine what, in the end, the results will be. What I do know, is that I have really enjoyed hearing from each of you. Some of the comments I have not responded to directly because I have found it difficult to respond out of my own experience, so I have just let the comments stand as they are.

My thoughts on the subject of art and its production resonate with many of the thoughts and comments that have been posted. I see art as an inner expression, one which we as artists cannot really prevent coming out. This inner well, or need to create, is different from talent or popularity. I personally believe that some people (or maybe all people) to one degree or another, have the ability to create. (I am using creation in the broad sense here, not just in an artistic sense, so creating a home for our families, or good work environments, would be included in this definition, as creation.) For an artist though, that inner well, calls them to produce in a different way and as individuals, they are not happy with themselves or life unless they are producing.

I think art, as a product, can have many purposes. The reasons may be political, spiritual or personal. In some cases, the need to produce art is an end in itself. All of this, I believe is encompassed in what, we today, call art.

Perhaps in the final analysis, art is the expression of the soul. (You don’t have to take that in any spiritual sense, but you could I guess). One artist once said that art, in and of itself, proves the presence of a creator. They present the belief that were we not ourselves created, we would not have a need or desire to create. I cannot really speak to the validity of that comment (though personally I do believe in God), but I do feel confident in saying that there appears to be some part of the human psyche that needs to create, that needs to produce something beyond itself in order to be fulfilled. What ever the reason for that, it appears reasonable to state that humans, by their nature, have creativity hardwired into them.

Which causes me to stop and reflect a bit on the talent issue and the relationship between Modigliani and Picasso. Clearly both men were talented, it is also equally clear that in their day, Modiglinai was recognized as the more talented. Yet, he is not the greater in terms of recognition or popularity. So even amongst artists, a differing level of talent does not necessarily equate to popularity. Perhaps this latter artifact is more a matter of charisma, social graces, position or political influence. (The latter comment not intending to be taken in the large “” sense).

For myself, I think true art resonates from the soul or, as I have called it, the inner well. When that inner experience comes out in ways that speak to others, and resonates with their experience, a piece of art achieves a level of recognition. Yet, even if what we produce from that inner experience does not achieve any level of recognition in the community around us, it does not make it invalid. In fact, I believe that art which is not recognized could actually be more valid because it is speaking to a reality which only the artist feels and sees. Popular “reality” is not always a reflection or true picture reality. Just as in the case between Modigliani and Picasso, popular opinion did not recognize the greater talent.

In making these final comments, I have in mind, those times in the history of our world when the popular conceptions of “right” and “real” turned out to be very damaging. (Eg: slavery, genocide, poverty, colonialism, starvation). There are many stores and questions after the fact of people wondering why, at the time they, or some other group did not, speak out. It was in fact the silence, that allowed these times to happen in so many histories of so many people around the world. In my mind, it kind of makes me wonder if one of the important roles of the artist is not simply to sit on the edge of society, and to speak reality back into it. Our society tends to become habituated to many things. The journey of art tends to be isolated and interior yet intimately connected with the events of our world. Because of that, perhaps artists have a valued place of providing clarity within society, not affected by the trends and “opular” concepts. Perhaps this is where we are all called, to create and to be ready to speak into the current reality, helping to create a reality that recognizes the differences amongst people, and the need for toleration and acceptance.

In my mind, there is enough anger and hate in the world. Perhaps it is time for artists to use their talents and abilities to expose the abuses, and to point to a better future that includes the toleration of differences and acceptance of other cultures, peoples and ways. While we cannot totally affect the world around us, I feel we have a valid place to speak out in our work and in our lives that we should not fear.