there is a thought expressed by many artists of the last centuries, the thought of being solitary, in their actions and thoughts, completely alone - understood by noone. some artists expressed these thoughts more direct, some indirect, some stronger, some more reluctant. but it can be found in many words and statements. similar, a lot of humans have felt, or expressed, similar emotions. but what is this "unbridgeable chasm" so many people - yet so few, compared to the masses - have experienced? how can an artist that is celebrated by - literally - millions of people still feel lonely?
it's easy to explain. art deals with ideas. thoughts, concepts. imagination, dreams, creativity. philosophy, reflection. and this is simply an impossibility for almost any living human being on planet earth. the general people are interested in direct, tangible, "down to earth" things, as they call it. cars. money. luxury. rising in social esteem. they can easily understood that a man uses up a lot of his energy to gain a tangible thing such as money. but they can never understood how someone could use up his "precious" time for something that is as abstract as art. it's not something they can directly touch. hold in their hands. so they don't understand it.
adults might be worried that a teenage girl spends time in her room alone drawing pictures. yet they would accept it if she went out to the world, got a job and bought things from this. hell, they even preferred it if she just went out (even without enough money) and looked at clothing and shoes, like other girls do. because this is something tangible. money, shoes, clothing you can touch. hold in your hands. art you cannot. well you can hold a picture; but this is just the paper you are holding; the artwork itself you cannot hold (as it could be on any medium). this is because art is, as i said, is related to thoughts, ideas, concepts.
now it is not as it would be impossible for the majority to hold ideas, or to be creative themselves. but there is one thing, that completely makes artists and a lot of other outcasts different from all other people. which is, that they - directly or indirectly, unconsciously or consciously - realize that ideas and thoughts can be important by themselves. that they can be worthy, wonderful, fantastic, great, marvelous - just as thoughts and ideas. this is the difference to the general man. a man might follow and pursue an idea too - if in the end he can again gain something tangible from it. a worker's strike is an idea too - a social and political idea. men might follow this idea and go on a strike, if they think they can get a rise in their pay by this. this money is something tangible again, that they can hold in their hands. but - at least in this day and age - a strike that is just for social justice, or peace, or another concept like this, would be rare[1]. because these again are mere ideas - not something tangible such as money - and people do not realize their worth. if people would be convinced a social or political action would never have a tangible or direct outcome, they would not pursue it - not for the idea alone. and this is the error and the mistake. for it is worth to do a vast numbers of things just for an idea. and this is the difference to the artist. plenty of artists not only - at first - did not gain and material, tangible thing from their art, they even sacrificed a lot of these things - money, belongings, sometimes even more than that - to be able to do their art. because they realize that the art itself - the idea of art, the ideas associated with their art - is worth a huge number of things. they don't *need* a material gain out of their art - because the art - it's ideas - on their own are already vastly pleasurably, great, wonderful, satisfying, important. this is something the "common" man can never understand. how can be an idea - on it's own - already be so important? so gratifying? so exciting? sure, they too, value ideas. the idea of a government, of capitalism maybe. but these are ideas that are - for them - tied into tangible and material things. they cannot see the value of an idea that is merely abstract.
an idea does not have to be tied in to something direct, tangible, to be worthy. it can be worthy pursuing, even if it is merely an idea, abstract, a theory - without ever having any "real" effect, even if forever it stays just an idea, an abstraction. the beauty, concept and pursuit of art irrefutably prove this.
mabye one in a million ever makes this realization in their lives. this explains the felt loneliness by the artists. as they already deal in ideas and realize their beauty. an artist could have plenty of fans, who think he, and his art, are more important than anything else in this world, and would do anything for him and his art - yet they are still billions of miles removed from him, do not understand one single thing. because they do not realize what exactly makes his art so important - the pursuit of ideas. it remains forever a mystery to them.
a similar emotion is felt by social outcasts, who too follow ideas. they might follow the ideas of a better society, of political, or cultural change - or even more abstract ideas and insights. this is what the others do not get about them. 'how come you follow an "idea"?', 'why don't you go out and have a good time' and other calls for them to focus on something more tangible. the others, again, do not realize how someone could follow, and dedicate a part of his life, to a mere idea - an idea that stays abstract, ideal.
but ideas can be more important than most things in this world.
footnotes:
[1]: in the past, worker's strikes for solidarity, or social progress itself - abstract ideas - actually did take place. i assume this is because in the past ideas were still valued more by people. how this ties in to this text would be too long to write down for this text.
No comments:
Post a Comment