Assumptions of Art

Art is universal
Literature has provided key works of art. Among the most popular ones being taught in
school are the two Greek epics, the Iliad and the Odyssey. The Sanskrit
pieces Mahabharata and Ramayana are also staples in this field. These works,
purportedly written before the beginning of recorded history, are believed to be man’s
attempt at recording stories and tales that have been passed on, known, and sung
throughout the years. Art has always been timeless and universal, spanning
generations and continents through and through.
            In every country and in every generation, there is always art. Oftentimes, people
feel that what is considered artistic are only those which have been made long time ago.
This is a misconception. Age is not a factor in determining art. An “art is not good
because it is old, but old because it is good”. In the Philippines, the works of Jose Rizal
and Francisco Balagtas are not being read because they are old. Otherwise, works of
other Filipinos who have long died would have been required in junior high school too.
The pieces mentioned are read in school and have remained to be with us because
they are good. They are liked and adored because they meet our needs and
desires. Florante at Laura never fails to teach high school students the beauty of love ,
one that is universal and pure. Ibong Adarna, another Filipino masterpiece, has always
captured the imagination of the young with its timeless lessons. When we recite
the Psalms, we feel in communion with King David as we feel one with him in his
conversation with God. When we listen to a kundiman or perform folk dances, we still
enjoy the way our Filipino ancestors whiled away their time in the past. We do not
necessarily like a kundiman for its original meaning. We just like it. We enjoy it. Or just
as one of the characters in the movie Bar Boys thought, kundiman makes one
concentrate better.
           The first assumption then about the humanities is that art has been crafted by all
people regardless of origin, time place, and that it stayed on because it is liked and
enjoyed by people continuously. A great piece of work will never be obsolete. Some
people say that art is art for intrinsic worth. In John Stuart Mill’s Utilitarianism (1879),
enjoyment in the arts belongs to a higher good, one that lies at the opposite end of base
pleasures. Art will always be present because human beings will always express
themselves and delight in these expressions. Men will continue to use art while art
persists and never gets depleted.
Art is not nature.
In the Philippines, it is not entirely novel to hear some consumers of local movies
remark that these movies produced locally are unrealistic. They contend that local
movies work around certain formula to the detriment of substance and faithfulness to
reality of the movies. These critical minds argue that a good movie must reflect reality
as closely as possible. Is that so?
           Paul Cezanne, a French painter, painted a scene from reality entitled Well and
Grinding Wheel in the Forest of the Chateau Noir.  The said scene is inspired by real
scene In a forest around the Chateau Noir area near Aix in Cezanne’s native Provence.
Comparing the two, one can see that Cezanne has changed some patterns and details
from the way they were actually in the photograph. What he did is not nature. It is art.
           One important characteristic of art is that it is not nature. Art is man’s expression
of his reception of nature. Art is man’s way of interpreting nature. Art is not nature. Art is
made by man, whereas nature is a given around us  It is in this juncture that they can be
considered opposites. What we find in nature should not be expected to be present in
art too. Movies are not meant to be direct representation of reality. They may, according
to the moviemaker’s perception of reality, be a reinterpretation or even distortion of
nature.
          The distinction assumes that all of us see nature, perceive its elements in myriad,
different, yet ultimately valid ways. One can only imagine that story of the five blind men
who one day argue against each other on what an elephant looks like. Each of the live
blind men was holding a different part of the elephant. The first was touching the body
and thus, thought the elephant was like a wall. Another was touching the beast’s ear
and was convinced that the elephant was like a fan. The rest were touching other
different parts of the elephant and concluded differently based on their perceptions. Art
is like each of these men’s view of the elephant. It is based on an individual’s subjective
experience of nature. It is not meant, after all, to accurately define what the elephant is
really like in nature. Artists are not expected to duplicate nature just as even scientists
with their elaborate laboratories cannot make nature.
           Once this point has been made, a student of humanities can then ask further
questions such as: What reasons might the artist have in creating something? Why did
Andres Bonifacio write “Pag-ibig saTinubuang Lupa?”What motivation did Juan Luna
have in creating his masterpiece, the Spoliarium? In whatever work of art, one should
always ask why the artist made it. What is it that he wants to show?
Arts involve experience.
Getting this far without a satisfactory definition of art can be quite weird for some. For
most people, art does not require a full definition. Art is just experience. By experience,
we mean the “actual doing of something”. When one says that he has an experience of
something, he often means that he knows what that something is about. When one
claims that he has experienced falling in love, getting hurt, and bouncing back, he in
effect claims that he know (sometimes) endless cycle of loving. When one asserts
having experienced preparing a particular recipe, he in fact asserts knowing how the
recipe is made. Knowing a thing is different from others what the said thing is. A radio
DJ dispensing advice on love when he himself has not experienced it does not only
really know what he is talking about. A choreographer who cannot execute a dance step
himself is a bogus. Art is always an experience. Unlike fields of knowledge that involves
data, art is known by experiencing. A painter cannot produce a work of art if a chisel is
foreign to him. Dudley, et al, affirmed that “aII art depends on experience, and if one is
to know art, he must know it not as fact or information but as experience.”
           A work of art then cannot be abstracted from actual doing, In order to know what
an artwork is, we have to sense it, see it or hear it, and see AND hear it. To fully
appreciate our national hero’s monument, one must go to Rizal Park and see the actual
sculpture. In order to know Beyonce’s music, one must listen to it to actually experience
them. A famous story about someone who adores Picasso goes something like this:
“Years ago, Gertrude Stein was asked why she bought the pictures of the then unknown
artist Picasso. ‘I like to look at them’ said Miss Stein”. At the end of the day, one fully
gets acquainted with art if one immerses himself into it. In the case of Picasso, one only
learns about Picasso’s work by looking at it. That is precisely what Miss Stein did.
           In matters of art, the subject’s perception is of primacy. One can read hundreds
of reviews about a particular movie, but at the end of the day, until he sees the movie
himself, he will be in no position to actually talk about the movie. He does not know the
movie until he experiences it. An important aspect of experiencing art is its being highly
personal, individual, and subjective. In philosophical terms, perception of art is always a
value judgment. It depends on who the perceiver is, his tastes, his biases, and what he
has inside him. Degustisbus non disputandumest (Matters of taste are not matters of
dispute). One cannot argue with another person’s evaluation of art because one’s
experience can never be known by another.
           Finally, one should also underscore that every experience with art is
accompanied by some emotion. One either likes or dislikes, agrees or disagrees that a
work of art is beautiful. A stage play or motion picture is particularly one of those art
forms that evoke strong emotions from its audience. With experience comes emotions
and feelings, after all. Feelings and emotions are concrete proofs that the artwork has
been experiences.