Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
©
2007
By PAUL HENRICKSON ©
2005
I realize that such a claim can be and has frequently been used
to trivialize the artistic effort generally and to legitimize the
culturally destructive efforts of dilettantes who seek the
patronage of bored, unintelligent, wealthy sources which seek
out the opportunities that will allow their egos to ride the
crests of fashion. Such are the fatuous.
The effort the creative artist makes to reach into that depth of
being where the deposit of universal prime evil soul-
knowledge resides is awesome and exhausting, at least for the
one who achieves it. For the observer who is able to
participate in this moment of sharing it is an ennobling
experience. Not many works of art achieve that level. As for
examples that do achieve it I would include the following:
Michelangelo’s “Last Judgment”, Rodin’s “Burghers of Calais”
and Mestrovic’s “Job”.
Michelangelo: “The Last Judgment”
August Rodin: “Burghers of Calais”
So, one may argue: ” But that is what art is all about…that is,
artifice!”
And one counters with the argument: “but that is what other
artists are trying to change, to free the creative spirit from the
slavery of having to represent an image of something other
than itself. In addition, to show that such an approach has as
much, if not more, validity in its attempt to inform the human
soul of values existing elsewhere as does the work of highly
talented illustrators.”
If one has ever talked with a five year old about what his
drawing represents it might have been noticed that frequently,
so long as there is not much of a time lapse between when the
drawing was done and the questioning about it, the child is
quite ready to tell you the meaning of nearly every mark that
he had made. Too much of a time laps and he probably
wouldn’t understand what you meant by the question. The
relationship, then, between the marks made and their meaning
seems very intimately connected with the actual motor
performance. Sometimes even adult actors have a problem in
answering questions of that sort not too long after having left
the stage. They will, however, be able to answer the question
given time to reconstruct what they know intellectually about
the role and to be able to recollect the experience of playing it
in front of the foot lights. If a researcher has ever asked a long
practicing artist whether or not an early work was indeed his
they, may also have noticed some significant hesitation in
responding to the question. What this speaks to, I believe, is a
state of mind, during the period of creation, which is quite
close to being a trance where the interrelationships between
events have a logical relationship all their own quite other
than such relationships occurring during normal relationship
periods. It is quite another universe, indeed.
All in all this fellow is, among other things, a performer, but his
audience is necessarily limited to a cultured, literate and
intellectually involved group of people. There may actually be
more of such people than it might appear at first glance and
the reason we fail to meet them is because they have learned
it is safer to be silent than witty.