In contemporary art, we do often know a great deal about the artist's intentions. Most exhibitions will feature artist statements and biographies to help keep viewers informed. As with most things these days we have an unprecedented amount of information about every step of the artist's progress - evident to anyone who has ever watched the extra material on a DVD.
For works from the past, obviously the information can be much more limited. On occasion we do have letters, diaries, and notebooks to help guide us, but much interpretation does come from conjecture. Still, you can infer a lot from a little inductive reasoning.
For many artists, misinterpretation can be a problem. But most recognize that once they have put a work up for display, it becomes a part of the public consciousness. Therefore, it becomes a candidate for interpretation and criticism.
You can see this with film a great deal. Have you ever heard someone argue the political implications of a popular film - even when you know that the actual story makes no direct reference to such beliefs. This is just part of the viewer's relationship with the creative work, and an artist just has to be willing to accept that. The artist can state that they never intended for any particular meaning, but that does not mean that the viewer's interpretation is without validity. Everyone just has to argue it out.
The enjoyment of something can happen on many levels. For many, math is just the use of numbers and equations to solve some problems. Those that are more informed recognize math as the language of the universe - a way in which the mysteries of existence can be decoded. In fields like theoretical physics, the wielding of mathematics becomes like an art form - much of it is intuitive and hypothetical. Once the the physicist has an idea, then the work begins to bring that idea into concrete form - crunch the numbers, so to speak. If the computations support the idea then that hypothesis is true - the universe works logically so anything stands up to logical tests is seen as an explanatory theory. A deeper understanding of the universe has been achieved - at least to those who understand it.
Creative works operate in a similar manner. You can appreciate something on the base level, or search for a deeper connection.
I give you two personal examples of this. Growing up I was fairly ignorant of science (outside of dinosaurs), and had little knowledge of the complexity of things. As I journeyed through college and grad school, I learned more and more about the universe and its history. The staggeringly epic story of the cosmos, and of life here on this planet, is so profound that it makes most mythologies and fictional stories seem mundane in comparison.
Second example - much more down to earth - I've always been a Batman fan. This goes back to infancy for me. I have dozens of toys and thousands of comic books. So you can imagine that I have enjoyed the last couple of Batman films that have come out.
When watching those films, I have an emotional connection to the characters and story that most of my friends do not. So while many of them enjoyed the films, the impact on me was all the greater.
I believe that this is why learning about a topic in depth (whether it be biology, art, or wine appreciation) is useful. It enriches the experience.
No comments:
Post a Comment