the art or the person

Sandra · Post by **Sandra** » Sun Mar 16, 2003 5:24 am

When we esteem an art do we esteem the art or the person?
Do artists become what their fans expect him (her) to be...? or are they really someone we will never know..?

lizzytysh · Post by **lizzytysh** » Sun Mar 16, 2003 5:47 am

It seems to me we can do either or both. We can esteem the art, while not caring for what we're aware of regarding the person. Or, we can admire the person [not what you're describing] and not care for their art. I think it depends on the personal strength or personal power within their contracted arrangements, or their willingness to sacrifice who they are for the sake of success. Some artists won't change who they are no matter what. It seems Leonard is one of the finest examples of this. Others, for the sake of gaining wanted success will transform themselves according to what their managers expect or what the perception is of what the fans expect.

What we really know about any of them is tenuous at best. We can go by interviews, but are they trying to create an image or are they being truthful about themselves. Consistency and continuity over expanses of time and "watching" how they actually lead their lives [via the best information we're able to get] can give a better sense of whether interview information has been accurate. Again, I think Leonard is exemplary in this area. Short of meeting someone in person and spending real time with them, it seems best to say we will never really know them.

Byron · Post by **Byron** » Sun Mar 16, 2003 4:01 pm

Can I give a very quick response? Art is seen in content and context. It is viewed in other forms as well, but the viewer is guided to some extent by the social mores of the time. By that I mean that as an example of this small part of art's appreciation, we could look at Oscar Wilde. He had a brilliant academic record, which I'm not going to rehearse here, and produced written and oral gems which were and are appreciated, as works of art. The big 'however' is of course his sexual orientation, which caused him to be villified by his peers, but which today would probably be completely ignored by all except the 'ignorant' few.
When looking at any stimulation of the senses we must always be aware of our own 'mind-set' and its influence, however subconcious and hidden is our individual reasoning.
But then again, I could be completely wrong. (as usual)

linmag · Post by **linmag** » Sun Mar 16, 2003 5:41 pm

It is also seductively easy to assume that the personality of the artist can be inferred by amalgamating the opinions / feelings expressed in their work. For instance, while it is probably true that each of Leonard's songs contains a little of what he thinks or believes, it is not necessarily true that if you put them all together you will come out with a full and rounded picture of the man himself.

lizzytysh · Post by **lizzytysh** » Sun Mar 16, 2003 5:58 pm

I second the "going deeper" additions of Byron and Linmag.

Sandra · Post by **Sandra** » Sun Mar 16, 2003 7:56 pm

when I wrote about this I was thinking about the way people idolize some artists and the reasons they have to do so.....
Perhaps the enjoyment we are able to feel for the art of a past person (I mean dead a long time ago) with a more far appreciation than we do when they are alive it is different than the one we can feel when they are "near us" and that the possibilities regarding the encounter with them make us to dream with the person himself . imagine different things about him and make him part of our lives.

lizzytysh · Post by **lizzytysh** » Sun Mar 16, 2003 8:07 pm

To a certain degree, I think that happens, in subtle ways, regardless. When they represent "us" and our moving through the world in the way we do, it's a certain kind of imbuement that occurs, on an atomic level if nothing else, i.e. the exchange of atoms that all matter is made of, simply in the listening and integrating.