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.

edward presents: we are artists

just thought i'd plug an upcoming workshop i'm conducting called we are artists. who are we? it's an exploration of a number of issues that impact us as artists, and specifically artists of faith, and we will be discussing questions around identity, training, community and Truth.

it's only $25 (which also includes supper) and takes place from 1:30-7 on july 4. if you're in the edmonton area, and are interested in attending, please contact dave at info@iloveartists.ca. there's only room for 15 so sign up early. if you can't make it, but are interested, let dave or myself know and we can always work towards another presentation.

anyway, i'm pretty excited - i love connecting, challenging and encouraging fellow artists and creatives. i love resourcing people, throwing around ideas, engaging with passionate intelligent people. that brings me joy.

what's an artist to do?

my name is asher lev also addresses the role and/or responsibility of the artist. whether that role can be separated from the artist's cultural context, or even isolated from an (any?) engagement with the world (and therefore finding one's place within it) is one that is explored in various ways. in walking out his calling as an artist, asher is forced to confront the question of the artist's place or function in society/ culture. it's an extremely crucial issue for him -- as it is for every artist. what is the artist supposed to be doing as they pursue their work? what should be their goal? what is their purpose? how do they do achieve that?

in a previous post about my name is asher lev, i referred to the passage where asher and his father discuss why asher makes the images he does, and how there was a language gap between the ideas asher was exploring and using in his process and the communication of [the importance] those ideas to his father and, by extension, the public. within that conversation, the question is raised about the potential dangers of the pursuit of aesthetics at the expense of morality. this is partially a question about the relationship between content and form (the artistic version of "the chicken or the egg" question), but it does raise an important question about the place of morality in art, both in its making and presentation. until fairly recently, art was always expected to have a point, a purposefulness as to its content. so it would that communication, or at least the possibility of [clear] communication, was a central concern. the question is, then, what is the weight of that content? how important is it that it be true? what risks will you take to convey the truth? are you willing to offend your potential public in the pursuit of your content? does that matter?

later on, another passage describes asher's deliberations as he works in paris. he immerses himself in the art and architecture and begins working. he doesn't rush the artistic process, and lives with his blank canvases for months. then, "away from my world, alone in an apartment that offered me neither memories nor roots, i began to find distant memories of my own, long buried by pain and time and slowly brought to the surface..."(p. 306/7). asher begins to reflect on his past relatives and their experiences: his "mythic ancestor" and how he made a russian nobleman prosperous, his grandfather "the scholar" and his work for the Rebbe, his father and his work rescuing ladover jews and establishing yeshivas in europe, his mother and her own anguish over the unfinished work of her brother and determination to complete it. this timeline, which stretches over several generations, stirs up questions about completing tasks, atoning for the past, about journeying and sacrifice and choosing life. this leads him to create a pivotal work, one which brings the question of "the morality of a work's content" versus "the aesthetics of the work" to a head. and that question is an important question. the question gets at the heart of the task of the artist: to create something in which the content and the form are perfectly balanced. to achieve wholeness.

"i had brought something incomplete into the world. now i felt its incompleteness. "can you understand what it means for something to be incomplete?" my mother had once asked me. i understood, i understood." (p. 312 top). i believe the question of [in]completeness is a core issue for the artist, as it is for asher. it is not only about the integrity of the work, it is also about the integrity of the artist. one of the ideas i am very interested in is the idea of Beauty in art. Beauty is more than simply some subjective aesthetic quality. it encompasses ideas of wholeness and completeness, and therefore has a moral element to it. Beauty and Truth are not that unrelated. they are like two sides of the same coin. ultimately, art's role - for asher at least - is to declare Truth or to express how one feels about things. there is a necessity for the artist to be Truth-full in what they are exploring, declaring, presenting and how they go about that. there must be an integrity in what they are working on. they must be convinced of the work, its importance, its usefulness, its ability to make difference in the world.

this reflects the belief, found throughout the book, in the power of creativity to shape the universe. this creativity isn't necessarily associated only with the arts, but can be expressed in any arena of life. even so, made in the image of G-d (we carry the imago dei, after all), we are inherently creative beings. all the characters - from the Master of the Universe/ Ribbono Shel Olom through asher and aryeh and rivkeh lev, to the rebbe and jacob kahn, to the numerous immigrants and refugees in the novel - exhibit creativity and the ability to adapt and respond to ever-changing conditions. this is an essential part of the artistic process - the ability to respond to and embrace change, and to use it to create something new. in fact, it is inherently redemptive in tone. so what will you do with your creativity? what will you create in the world? to what end?

who's an artist to be?

my name is asher lev also addresses the issue of the artist's identity. whether that identity can be separated from the artist's cultural context, or how that plays out in their engagement with the world (and thereby finding one's place within it) is one that is explored in various ways. in pursuing his calling as an artist, asher is constantly made aware of how his identity impacts the politics and realities of this other culture he is entering. he is repeatedly faced with the question of the artist's cultural position and place or function in society. it's an extremely crucial issue for him; as it is for every artist. are you an artist first? or is that secondary? can you be an artist without knowing who you are? how do you know who you are? can you figure that own on your own? do you discover that in context of community (or communities)?

it is important to note the importance of a mentor throughout the book. while his parents didn't understand their son, they sought advice and it was determined that asher should receive training for his talent (in addition to training for his soul, of course). his mentor - jacob kahn - focussed primarily on asher's artistic ability, though many of the things he addressed also had repercussions for how asher lived, especially in the area of integrity (and really, identity).

jacob challenged asher to be true to his artistic vision, above all costs, but that he should also be true to who he was. this included embracing or not embracing his own cultural heritage and its expressions (such as side curls or hat or suit). the issue was to make one's own choices and be secure in those choices, not to be ashamed or influenced by others' ideas of who one was supposed to be or what one was supposed to look like or how one was supposed to behave. "to thine own self be true", jacob demanded. this instilled in asher a strength to embrace those aspects of himself, and that in turn gave him the strength to pursue whatever he needed in order to create the work he felt he must.

shortly after he begins being mentored by jacob kahn, asher's mother brings him a book. the book, robert henri's "the art spirit" (interestingly, it's an actual book by henri, who was a member of the ashcan group of painters), contains advice for the artist that will enable him to keep focus and pursue their art: "[the artist] should be powerfully possessed by one idea. He should be intoxicated with the idea of the thing he wants to express" (p. 195) while there certainly must be that kind of commitment and passion to one's chosen subject or idea, the question is, "at what cost?". another quote from henri's book emphasizes again that an artist's allegiance is to the work alone:

every great artist is a man who has freed himself from his family, his nation, his race. every man who has shown the world the way to beauty, to true culture, has been a rebel, a "universal" without patriotism,without home, who has found his people everywhere. (p. 201)

but something in this strikes asher as false. "i don't think i want to free myself that way", he says to his mother the morning after reading the above passage. and i agree with him wholeheartedly. i think that somehow it is false to remove yourself from your tradition or cultural context. it's a denial of who you are and where you came from. not that i think your work always has to address that history, overtly or covertly, but that is a place from where you can work, whether in celebration or interrogation. we are, after all, [always] products of our environments. one's cultural context is an important touchstone for the creation of art. "i believe it is man's task to make life holy" (p. 201) asher says, when questioned about his beliefs and, in essence, who he is. the question is whether the positions he holds, the values he espouses, can survive the demands of the art process. perhaps that's where a community outside of the art community gives us strength to enter the fray of art. our art comes out of something, some place, emotional, ideological, spiritual -- it does not form itself ex nihilo, out of nothing. there are negotiations and decisions to be made. who will you choose to be? how will that shape your work?