making your way: artistic tradition(s)

in addition to being part of various cultural traditions, we are also engaged in any number of artistic traditions. or at least at some point we need to recognize which artistic tradition(s) we are engaging with as we create our work. that means deciding whether we want to work within it, or against it (or perhaps, more usefully, somewhere in between).

The following morning, I returned to the Accademia and stood for more than a hour drawing the David. I drew the head, with the eyes that reflected the decision to enter the arena of power; I drew the huge veined hands that would soon kill; I drew the shouldered sling being lifted in preparation for the delivery of death. The little man with the broken nose had created this sculpture in an act of awesome rebellion against his tradition and his teacher. Other Davids I had seen were small in size and represented David after the battle. This David was a giant and represented the decision to enter the battle. The little Italian had effected a spatial and temporal shift that had changed the course of art. (p.297)

i understand tradition as being an ongoing process - we are [hopefully] part of living traditions. traditions are constantly being transformed and reinvented for new contexts and new participants, though the essentials remain the same. tradition is about how we acknowledge, celebrate, participate. i don't subscribe to the modernist idea that the artist must always subvert or overthrow (or even re-invent) traditions in order to be an artist. the relationship between artist and tradition need not be antagonistic.

tied to this attitude is the idea (and pressure) that the artist must always create something new i.e. be "original". this is a pretty specious idea anyway, but if we applied this idea as a touchstone of what it means to be an artist, many of the great historic artists couldn't be considered terribly "original" as they worked in specific traditions, adding small shifts and introducing new elements in their work. even then, those changes were as often generated by cultural/ philosophical shifts as by any novel invention by the artists themselves. we talk about originality as if it is possible to make radical breaks with tradition, but in fact, originality is always determined by its relationship to established [cultural] traditions.

anyway, i think it is when we discuss where we are within our own artistic tradition(s) that we use that rarefied arts language. but even then we must be aware of what we are really saying when we position ourselves. we need to have spent the time truly exploring and 'unpacking'; analyzing, contextualizing and interrogating those narratives. after all, they aren't neutral. again, the following exchange (found on p. 289/90) opens up some questions around this idea:

"Why do you have to paint and display to the public things that are offensive?"

"They aren't offensive to people who understand art."

“They’re offensive to people like me, Asher. I’m asking you why you have to paint that way.”

“Because I’m an artist”

“Asher, look at me. I’m not a fool. I speak to senators and governors…I have a bachelor’s and a master’s in political science. Explain it to me so I can understand it. Why do you have to paint and display nudes?”

“Because I’m part of a tradition, Papa. Mastery of the art form of the nude is very important to that tradition. Every important artist who ever lived drew or painted the nude.”

“Art is a tradition.”

“Yes.”

“I understand. But why is the nude so important in this tradition?”

“Because it has always been part of that tradition.”

“Who began it?” “The Greeks.” “Ah,” he said.

“The Greeks. Our old friends, the Greeks. All right, Asher. I can understand a little better now why you paint nudes. Why do you display them?”

“I don’t want to sit in a room painting for myself. I want to communicate what I do. And I want critics to know I can do it.”

“Even if it offends people?”

“Everything offends someone.”

“Even if it offends your father?”

I did not respond.

“There is such a thing as respect for your father. That’s also a tradition.”

“I respect you, Papa. But I can’t respect your aesthetic blindness.”

“Aesthetic blindness?…An interesting concept. Aesthetic blindness. And what about moral blindness, Asher?”

“I’m not hurting anybody, Papa.”

“One day you will Asher. This will lead you to the sitra achra.”

“No.”

“Asher, if you had a choice between aesthetic blindness and moral blindness, which would you choose?”

I said nothing.

this passage puts its finger on several questions, but the most important point is our unquestioning acceptance of [the artist's] status quo; the mythology and machinery of what it means to be an artist -- and, perhaps, especially a contemporary/ 'cutting-edge' artist. [self] awareness of oneself as an artist is key to being able to engage with your 'project', your message, content, subject, whatever. this self-awareness is not simply limited to an inwardly focussed appraisal or declaration of our psychological, emotional and/or spiritual existence, but also one's place within the [various] artistic traditions and social contexts one moves, lives and breathes in and amongst. in essence, as an artist, what do you do, and why? and does the way in which you make your work affect its production and reception? because i dothink that matters. a lot.

an anniversary poem for my wife

Let me start by saying this:
i am still surprised by my luck (though you would say, “it’s not luck”),
still surprised by this thing we’re working on and walking through –
a mystery called marriage; this strange journey of embrace and covenant.

Volumes have been written about love and the shapes it makes
and we could add a few chapters ourselves. Some poems, a song or two;
notes about perseverance, and growth, and hope. Yes, hope.

Vision sometimes blurs as we busy ourselves,
labouring over the obvious, focussed on the
intimate details of fear and regret. But i know we are
emerging into new fields. Not simply gleaning the edges –
turning seed into fruitfulness into harvest into joy.

a body is

i am working towards a solo exhibition in november, and would like your help generating some imagery for a piece. please complete the phrase below, using a word or phrase, as many times as you would like:

a body is __________.

while you're at it, you may want to contribute to rivane neuenschwander's online component for her exhibition at the new museum. share a wish or your first love. i plan to visit repeatedly.

thankee.

discuss: "all art is either spiritual or decorative"

i recently renewed my membership with CIVA (i generally do so every 2 years so that I can be in their bi-annual artists' directory - hopefully that will one day lead to more connections to other artists of faith). as part of that purchase, i ordered the last few issues of their magazine, CIVA SEEN. in the introductory essay of issue vol IX.2, there is the following statement:

"all art is either spiritual or decorative"

personally, i love these kinds of absolute, polarizing statements. i love it when people actually take a position. that creates opportunity for discussion. then again, i think that the more one argues (and by argue, i mean "to make clear"; implying a process of reasoning), the more truth emerges. those kinds of statements position and place us, and force us to examine [exactly] where we stand on an issue, or what we think or believe about certain ideas. and what we don't.

naturally, i am interested in many of the concepts and tensions raised by this statement: ideas around art, faith and spirituality; the sublime; notions of Truth and Beauty; the fear of kitsch and use of the colloquial and commonplace; audiences and community; art's use and function; the connecting between creativity and spirituality. i think this statement circles around many of these ideas, and hints at the tension between communicating something and the way in which we do that, without saying one is more important than the other (though we might disagree). the more i think through this statement, the more i think it is touching on something quite substantially important regarding the content and purpose of art. do you agree with the above statement? why or why not?

finding a place

another subject that my name is asher lev explores is the idea of the artist's calling, and to what extent ability, tradition and culture influence that calling. now, the term "calling" can be confusing so i would like to suggest that you view as referring to one's vocation, or task, or even responsibility. of course, for one's calling to be fulfilled requires that one be actively pursuing that calling. the phrase "millions of people can draw" occurs repeatedly in the book, and this is significant in regards to the calling of the artist. it suggests that being an artist is about more than simply technical ability or skill. it's not just about rendering. it's about communicating something through images (or words or the body or the voice or an instrument) that is more than that technical ability. or the ability to copy a photograph. the fact is that millions of people can draw. that doesn't make them artists.

in any case, the artist needs to move beyond that base ability. not only do they need to develop their skills further, adding to their 'toolbox', they also need to discover the story they are meant to tell. whether that story (or content or subject) is about the world or people or "the human condition" or about art and its elements (read: abstraction) is up to the artist. that said, i like the idea voiced by jacob kahn and anna schaeffer that "art is whether or not there is a scream in you wanting to get out in a special way...or a laugh" (p. 203). there is something needs saying. how will you say it? how will you say it if you lack the tools and knowledge to do so?

the idea of finding your place requires that you know who you are as a person and as an artist. there is an inherent distrust of careerist, strategizing artists - artists whose work is intended to cash in on the latest market trends rather than pursuing their own content or subject. kahn challenges asher to choose who he is on his own terms, and not to make decisions in order to ingratiate himself with others (and, it is suggested, to become successful as an artist). who one is as an artist finds its foundation in who you are as a person. it is crucial for you to have integrity as a person, or you will have no integrity as an artist. this is an important point. there is also an indictment of the whole notion of the artist's persona as a marketing tool, the cultivation of an attitude or look in order to be accepted as an artist. if one's acceptance as an artist is dependent on those things, how can one truly know how good their art is? the true artist wants their work to be judged on the merits of their work, not their public performance. believe me, i've been there:

this sense of identity is tied to a larger sense of the value of tradition, both cultural and artistic. this can be a tremendous tension for the artist, and requires them to make choices as they pursue their work. where are you from? where are you going? it is important to know who you are, and we discover much of this in the context of our community (and communities). we are shaped by our family relationships, we are shaped by the impact of our nationality and its cultural expressions, we are shaped by the weight of that history as it filters down through the generations. as we grow and change, we make decisions about what we will or won't embrace, and these too shape us and how we make our way in the world. to think that none of this impacts the art we make is an act of denial that weakens us as artists, and thins us out as people. that cultural tradition provides us a place to work from, to live from, to move from. we ignore our [cultural] traditions at our own peril.